I 




ON 



BX 7 



CONTENTS, 



LETTER L 

introductory Remarks — Zeal of Unitarians to propagate 
their opinions — Design of these Letters — Attention to the 
subject earnestly requested— Leading articles of the 
Unitarian Creed — The present no sectarian dispute- 
Importance of the points in controversy. — p. 9 3d« 

LETTER II. 

Prejudices cherished by many against Orthodoxy — First 
Prejudice, that Orthodoxy is austere and repulsive- 
Considered, and an attempt made to remove it — Se- 
cond Prejudice, that Orthodoxy lays too much stress 
on opinions — Shewn to be unfounded- — Unitarians have, 
at different times, made themselves equally liable to this 
charge— Thirdly ; the spirit of Orthodoxy is a perse- 
secuting spirit— Refuted.— p. 36—70, 



LETTER 1IL 



Subject continued — Fourth Prejudice— against every 
thing Mysterious in Religion— Examined, and sherm to 



CONTENTS. 



be unreasonable — Danger of adopting it as a general 
principle— Fifth Prejudice — The authority of Great 
Names — This plea wholly unsound, and unscriptural—*- 
So far as it has force, proved to be more in favour of 
Orthodoxy than of Unitarianism, — p. 71 HO. 

LETTER IV. 

The Scriptures the only rule of faith and practice—Testi- 
mony of Scripture. decisive in favour of Orthodoxy — - 
The Early Fathers equally clear in support of the 
same — Barnabas — Clemens Romanus — Poly carp — 

Ignatius Irenceus — - Theophilus— Justin Martyr*— 

Melito — Athenagoras- — Tatian — Clemens Alexandrin- 
us — Andronicus — Tertullian — Minucius Felix — Ori- 
gen — Cyprian — Dio nysius of Alexandria — Nova- 

iian Arnobius — Lactantius — Gregory Thaumatur- 

gus — Athanasius — -Martyrs worshipped Christ. — p? 
Ill 148. 

LETTER V. 

Subject continued — Testimony drawn from the Heresies of 
the first four centuries — Cerinthians—Ebionites— Mar- 
tian — Theodotus—A rtemon—Noetus — Praxeas — Paul 
of Samosata — Arius — Macedonius — These hereticks de- 
nied the name of Christians—Their Baptisms pronoun- 
ced void— Testimony of Pagans — Pliny — Hierocles— 



CONTENTS, 



vn 



Celsus — -Lucian — Witnesses of the Truth — Pauli- 
cians — Waldenses — Wickliffites — Hussites— Reform- 
ers — Remarks on this testimony, — p. 149 ISO, 

LETTER VL 

Unitarians reject the inspiration of the Scriptures— Differ- 
ence between them and the Orthodox with respect to the 
proper office of Reason in examining revelation — Ob 
jtctions to the Unitarian principle on this subject- 
Quotations from Unitarian writers, shewing that they 
really act upon the principle ascribed to them — Speci- 
mens of Unitarian exposition — Consequences of this 
mode of expounding the word of God. — p, 191 >23£ 3 

LETTER VII. 

Truth to be tried by its practical influence — Objections to 
Unitarianism on this ground — Unitarianism disposed 
to deny or conceal its principles — Indifferent to truth- 
Hostile to the exercises of Vital Piety — Deficient in 
yielding support and consolation in Death — Unfriendly 
to the Spirit of Missions — Every where more agreea- 
ble to Infidels, than any other system which bears the 
Christian name. — p. 235 -278, 

LETTER VIII. 



Objections likely to be made by Unitarians to the foregoing- 



vni 



CONTENTS. 



statements — Answer — Advice with respect to thepmp 
er manner of treating Unitarians — Reasons in suppor 
of that advice— Concluding Remarks and Counsel**— 
p. 279—312, 



LETTERS, &q 



LETTER I. 

introductory Remarks— Design of these Letters-' Unites 
rian Creed — Importance of the subject. 

Christian Brethren, 

A train of events, as unexpected as unsought 
by me, has led to the present publication. When, 
in the course of the last year, my ardent desire 
to promote your welfare, and my affectionate 
respect for your young Pastor, prompted me to 
consent, on the day of his Ordination, to address 
you from the pulpit, I little thought that oblo- 
quy and controversy were to result from the 
service of that day. But so it has happened. 
Some of your Unitarian neighbours have deemed 
it proper to make me an object of repeated at- 
tack, and my sermon on that occasion a subject 
of protracted and tedioas discussion. I have 
seldom been more surprised than to find, that 
a few plain sentences, which were delivered 



12 



LETTEit I. 



From the pulpit and the press, by the formal 
volume, the humble pamphlet, and every variety 
of exhibition that ingenuity can devise, they are 
endeavouring to make an impression on the 
publick mind, in every direction, and with a 
profusion of the most lavish kind, they are daily 
scattering abroad their instruments of seduction. 
Probably in no part of our country out of Massa- 
chusetts, do these poisoned agents so completely 
fill the air, or, like one of the plagues of Egypt^ 
so noisomely "come up into your houses, your 
" chambers, and your kneading troughs," as in 
Baltimore* In fact, the Unitarians in that 
neighbourhood seem to be emulating the zeal of 
some of their brethren in England, who have 
been known to go into an Orthodox church; to 
withdraw during the prayer, that they might not 
join in "idolatrous devotions;" and on their 
return, to strew on a Communion table, which 
happened to be spread on that day, a parcel of 
Socinian tracts, and pamphlets.* 1 have heard 
of nothing quite equal to this in th,e United 
States; but, from present appearances, am by 
no means confident that something of the same 

, *Ryland's Partiality and Unscriptural Direction of 
Socman Zeal, p. 3-9 e 



LETTER L 



13 



kind will not soon be exhibited. Now, though I 
have no fear of the influence of all this on the 
minds of those who read, and think, and in- 
quire, and pray: yet there may be others to 
whom an antidote is not wholly unnecessary. 
The sagacious and eloquent Mr. Burke has 
somewhere said, u Let us only suffer any per- 
il son, however manifestly he may be in the wrong, 
"to tell us his story, morning and evening, but 
" for one twelve-month, and he will be our mas- 
M ter/' In almost every congregation there is a 
considerable number to whom this maxim applies 
with peculiar force. The young and inexperi- 
enced, who are not aware of the insidious arts of 
error; the busy, who nave but little taste for 
reading, and little time or disposition for pro- 
found reflection; the amiable, who are ready 
to look with a partial eye on every serious and 
plausible claim; and the gay and worldly, who 
are predisposed in favour of an indulgent sys- 
tem;— all these, when frequently assailed by 
the zealous, the confident, and the talkative 
patrons of heresey, will be peculiarly liable to be 
unduly impressed in their favour. When they 
every day hear individuals, and every day meet 
with pamphlets, which, on the one hand, in the 

2 



Letter i. 



most triumphant tone, praise the Unitarian syS- 
tern, as the only enlightened, liberal, benevo- 
lent and rational system, and its adherents as 
decisively the most learned, amiable, ai d pioti? 
friends of truth, and candid inquiry; and, on 
the other hand, stigmatize its opponents, as nar- 
row-minded, prejudiced, austere, righteous over- 
much, and enemies of liberal thinking; — when 
they find these representations made every dayj 
and repeated without contradiction, they will be 
apt at length to believe them. When they find 
jso many confident assertions, so many plausible 
professions, and so many high authorities, vaunt- 
ed on one side, and little or nothing of a counter 
kind produced on the other; they may begin to 
think that there is really more to be said in fa- 
vour of what they hear called heresey, and less 
in support of what they have been accustomed to 
think truth, than they once imagined. 

It is for such persons, more especially, that I 
write. Though neither their occupations or 
habits will allow the greater part of them to read 
a large work, they may be willing to spare an 
hour or two, occasionally, to go through a small 
-manual. And though they would not perhaps 



LETTER L 



feel much interest in the best written treatise, by 
a distant stranger, who had no particular refer? 
ence to themselves; yet they may be disposed to 
listen, for a short time, to one who gives some 
evidence that he ardently desires the prosperity 
of -them and their Pastor, and who has written 
with a special view to their benefit. 

I would then, my Christian Friends, most res- 
pectfully and earnestly entreat your serious at- 
tention to this subject. Pass it not by as an un- 
important speculation. Give at least a transient 
hearing to one who has something to say to you, 
which he considers as deeply momentous, and 
who is conscious of no aim but that of doing 
you good. Recollect that the cause of truth has 
more to fear from the indolence, and indifference 
of those who profess to be her friends, than 
from the activity or the arguments of her ene- 
mies. Recollect, too, that the native tendency 
of the human heart is to embrace some such 
corrupt and delusive system as that which calls 
itself Unitarianism. Many who respect Religion 
in general, and who would abhor the thought of 
throwing off all regard to it; yet desire to have 
it so modified, as to give them as little trouble;. 



LETTER I. 



and subject them to as little restraint, as possible,. 
Many others are in reality infidels; but are un- 
willing to avow it, on account of the pain which 
such an avowal would inflict upon their friends^ 
and the disgrace which it might draw upon them- 
selves; and, therefore, are disposed to resort to 
something which bears the name of Christianity, 
while it makes few demands, either on their faith 
or practice, essentially different from their infi- 
del creed. And there are not a few who have 
had a pious education, and whose consciences 
will not suffer them to rest without some form 
of godliness, while, at the same time, they su- 
premely love the world, and the things of the 
world. — All these will be naturally apt to take 
refuge in Unitarianism; especially if it be recom- 
mended by a plausible and confident advocate, 
or have obtained currency to any considerable 
extent among the splendid and fashionable around 
them. Something such persons must have, to 
save appearances, or to satisfy conscience; and 
Unitarianism will give less pain to natural feel- 
ing; will call for less self-denial; and will more 
readily accommodate itself to every sort of pur 
suit and habit, except that which is righf, than 
any other scheme which calls itself by the rjamo. 



LETTER I. 



of Christianity. These considerations, my 
Friends, ought very solemnly to impress your 
minds. If sucli be the natural tendency of the 
human heart, who can say that he has no inter- 
est in the subject? Even supposing that you are 
in no danger yourselves from these temptations 
— a supposition which no professor of religion 
who feels as he ought the deceitfulness of his 
own heart, will be ready to admit; — still your 
children, and other relatives, may be seriously 
exposed to danger. It behoves you, then, to 
exercise the most constant and anxious care, that 
they be properly armed against the enemy; that 
they do not fall a prey to his seductions, from 
want of fidelity on the part of those whom God 
has constituted the guardians, no less of their 
spiritual, than of their temporal welfare. 

You will not expect me, in these Letters, to 
enter at large into the controversy between the 
Orthodox and the Unitarians. A number of 
distinguished Individuals, both in our own 
country and in Europe, within a few years 
past, as well as in former times, have written 
so largely and so well, on this branch of polemick 
theology, that I forbear lo undertake the dis 



18 



LETTER L 



eussion of the general subject. The limits to 
which I confine myself, do not admit of this. 
Nor is it necessary. My purpose is, to treat, 
in a very cursory manner, a few points in the 
controversy, chiefly practical, which, though 
not wholly neglected by other writers, have not 
been so frequently or fully exhibited as I could 
have wished to see them. Those who have an 
opportunity and a taste for more extensive and 
critical reading on the subject, will, of course, 
seek for other and larger works. In the mean 
time, if, by taking a view of the subject more 
adapted to those who have little leisure, and no 
convenient access to the volumes of the learned, 
I shall be the means of satisfying a single doubt- 
ing inquirer, or of putting on his guard one 
whose foot was about to slide, I shall consider 
myself as most richly rewarded. 

I hope, my Christian Friends, it is unneces- 
sary for me to assure you, that in offering to 
your consideration the following remarks, I have 
not an unfriendly feeling towards any individuals 
on earth who bear the Unitarian name. On the 
contrary, unless I am deceived, the most hearty 
good will, and the most unfeigned desire to pro- 



LETTER I. 



19 



mote their welfare, have actuated me in this un- 
dertaking, and in ail that I have written. No 
attack on private character is intended, [f I 
know myself, I abhor every weapon of this kind. 
It is not with the persons of Unitarians that I 
have to do; but with their acknowledged prin- 
ciples. These, I am persuaded, are not only 
erroneous, but awfully and destructively so. No 
man who allows himself to reflect, can be neuter 
or indifferent in this warfare. It is a warfare 
waged for all that is glorious in the Gospel, and 
for all that is precious in the hopes of man. De- 
liberately believing as I do, that the system of 
the Unitarians is nothing less than a total denial 
and subversion of the Christian religion; and 
that, so far as they gain an influence, it is, like 
that of the fabled Syrens of old, to allure but to 
destroy; it is impossible for me to think of ma* 
king terms with such a system. Having profess 
sed to devote myself unreservedly and forever 
to the glory of the ever blessed Redeemer, "wo 
" is me" if I consent, for a moment, to parley 
with those who blaspheme his name, or would 
degrade his religion! Whatever may be the 
sacrifice, even if it be that of life itself, this must 
be forborne and abhorred* While, therefore, I 



£0 



LETTER I>. 



respect the persons, and desire to promote the 
happiness, of those who embrace the heresy in 
question, I am bound, as a conscientious man, to 
do all in my power to expose the sin and danger 
of the heresy itself, and to warn my fellow men 
against its fatal allurements. And this, by the 
grace of God, I am resolved to do, as long as the 
convictions are such as have long impressed, 
and do now, with growing strength, impress my 
mind. 

But before we proceed further, it may not be 
improper to pause a moment, and inquire, what 
is meant by Unitarianism ? What system ot faith 
does this title designate? It is a specious title. 
It purports, at first view, and is, perhaps, really 
intended to convey an impression to the pupular 
mind, that those who bear it, are the only be- 
lievers in one God, while all others believe in 
a plurality of Gods. Be on your guard, I pray 
y^u, against this illusion; for, whether intended 
or not, it deserves no other name. The Ortho- 
dox, it is well known, contend for the Unity of 
God as steadfastly and zealously as Unitarians, 
or any other denomination, have ever done. But 
when we speak of Unitarians, we mean to point 



LETTER L 



St 



tut those who reject the Bible doctrine of the 
Trinity in Unity; who contend that there is 
in Jehovah bat one Person, as well as one Es- 
sence; and who, with the doctrine of the Trin- 
ity, reject all the other peculiar and funda- 
mental doctrines of the Gospel. Those who 
bear this name, are, indeed, by no means Jagreed 
among themselves. Some entertain a higher 
opinion of the Redeemers character than others, 
as well as different sentiments on some other 
fundamental doctrines of Christianity. It is 
obviously impossible, therefore, in any one state- 
ment, to exhibit the opinions of all who profess 
to belong to this general denomination. But the 
great body of those who call themselves Unitari- 
ans in Great Britain and the United States, 
substantially agree, it is believed, in the follow- 
ing opinions. 

They believe that the doctrine of the Trinity 
is not found in Scripture^ that it is one of the 
corruptions of Christianity, and among the ear- 
liest and most mischievous of those corruptions a 
This is so well known, that no proof or illustra- 
tion of it is required. 



12 



LETTER I. 



They believe that Christ was a mere max; 
that he was the son of Joseph and Mary, born 
in the ordinary way; that he had no existence 
previously to his birth and appearance in Judea; 
that he was not only fallible, bet liable to 
six, like other men; and that, of course, he 
ought by no means to be worshipped. Dr. 
Priestley expressly says, that the apostles had 
no other ideas of Christ than "that he was 

"A MAN LIKE THEMSELVES.'** Again; he 

says, "It is the clear doctrine of scripture that 
"Christ was simply a man."t Mr. Belsham 
goes further, ^and suffers himself to speak in 
the following shocking terms: "The Unitarian 
" doctrine is, that Jesus of Xazareth was a man 
"constituted in all respects like other men, sub- 
"ject to the same infirmities, the same igxor- 

" AXCE, PREJUDICES, AXD FRAILTIES. Unita- 

" rians maintain, that Jesus and his apostles 

" were supernatural!) 7 instructed, as far as was 

" necessary for the execution of their commis- 

" siori; that is, for the revelation and proof of 

" the doctrine of eternal life, and that the favour 

"of God extended to the Gentiles equally with 

"the Jews; and that Jesus and his Apostles, and 

* History of the Corruptions of Christianity, 1. p. 2* 
+ Ibid. p. 6. 



LETTER L 



" others of the primitive believers, were occasion* 
u §\\y inspired to foretel future events. But 
" they believe that supernatural inspiration was 
"limited to these cases alone; and that when 
u Je-us or his Apostles deliver opinions upon 
K Subjects unconnected with the object of their 
"mission, such opinions, and their reasonings 
"upon them, are to be received with the same 
u attention and caution, with those of other 
u persons, in similar^ circumstances, of similar 
"education, and with similar habits of think- 
M ing." Further, he says, "The moral charac- 
u ler of Christ, through the whole course of his 
"publick ministry, as recorded by the Evangel- 
u ists, is pure and unimpeachable in every par- 
u ticular. Whether this perfection of character 
" in publick life,, combined with the general dec- 
" laration of his freedom from sin, establish, or 
" were intended to establish, the fact, that Jesus^ 
u through the whole course of his private life, 
u was completely exempt from all the errors and 
" frailties of human nature, is a question of m 
"great intrinrick moment, and concerning which 
44 we have no sufficient data to lead to a satis* 
factory conclusion.' 1 * In another work, Mn 

*Ca!m Inquiry into the Scripture Doctrine concerning' the 
Person of Christ, p. 190. 447', 451. 



54 



LETTER L 



Belsham, in consistency with the foregoing state- 
ment, observes — "Jesus is, indeed, now alive* 
" but as we are totally ignorant of the place where 
"he resides, and of the occupations in which he 
"is engaged, there can be no proper foundation 
" for religious addresses to him, nor of gratitude 
"for favours now received, nor yet of confidence 
a in his future interposition in our behalf/'* 

Unitarians with one voice, also, deny the 
divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit. 
Dr. Priestley declares, that by the Holy Spirit 
we are to understand nothing more than the 
power or influence of God, and by no means a 
distinct person. f Mr. Belsham, with still more 
freedom, and less decorum, allows himself to 
say, "The distinct, personal existence of the 
"Holy Spirit, is, I believe, abandoned by every 
"person who has paid much attention to the 
a phraseology of the scriptures." — And again s 
"The controversy (respecting the personality of 
"the Holy Spirit,) is almost as much at rest as 
8 that concerning transubstantiation. r j 

* Review of JPilberforce, fyc. Letter VIIL p. 74. 
j Hist, of the Corruptions, &c. 1.88. 
\ Review of Wilberforce, SfC. Vlh 



LETTER 1. 



As Unitarians reject the Divinity of Christ, 
so they also reject the Doctrine of his atone- 
ment. Dr. Priestley says, this doctrine is "one 
ci of the radical, as well as the most generally pre- 
" vailing corruptions of the Christian scheme/" 
And again, he calls it, "a disgrace to Chris- 
tianity, and a load upon it, which it mast 
" either throw off, or sink under."* Further, 
he say.-, "Christ being only a man, his death 
i; could not in any proper sense of the word, 
"atone for the sins of other men^j Again, he 
asserts, that "in no part either of the Old or 
* 6 New Testament, do we ever find, asserted or 
'"explained, the principle on which the doctrine 
"of atonement is founded: but that, on the con- 
" trary, it is a sentiment every where abounding*, 
" that repentance and a good life, are of 
"themselves sufficient to recommend us 
" to the favour of god."| Rdsham, on 

this subject, declares — "The death ot Jesus is 
"sometimes called a propitiation, because it put 
"an end to the Mosaic economy, and introdu- 
ced a new and more liberal dispensasioiu 

* Theol.Rep. V. p. 124. 429. 

f Hist* of the Corruptions of Christianity, l.jp. 227r 
t TheoL Repos. Up. 263. 



LETTER I. 



" under whieh the Gentiles, who were before re- 
& l garded as enemies, are admitted into a state of 
"amity and reconciliation; that is, into a state 
"of privilege similar to that of the Jews. Jt is 
"also occasionally called a sacrifice, being the 
"ratification of that new covenant into which 
"God is pleased to enter with his human off- 
spring, by which a resurrection to immortal 
"life and happiness is promised, without dis- 
tinction, to all who are truly virtuous. Believ- 
" ers in Christ are also said to have Redemption 
"though his blood, because they are releas- 

" SED, BY THE CHRISTIAN COVENANT, FROM 
" THE YOKE OF THE CEREMONIAL LAW, AND 
" FROM THE BONDAGE OF IDOLATRY."* 

They further, deny Original sin. They 
say that all men come into the world perfectly 
innocent and pure; as entirely free from the 
least taint of moral pollution as Adam was, when 
he first came from the hands of the Creator; 
that he is by nature no more inclined to 
tice than to VIRTUE; that he derives from, 
his ancestors a frail and mortal nature: is made 
with appetites which fit him for the condition in 

f Review of WUberforce, (J-c. Letter II, 



LETTER I, 



27 



which God has placed him; but that, in order to 
their answering all the purposes intended, they 
are so strong as to be very liable to abuse by 
excess: that he has passions implanted in him* 
which are of great importance in the conduct of 
life; but which are equally capable of impelling 
him into a right or a wrong course: that he has 
natural affections, all of them originally good, 
but liable, by a wrong direction, to be the oc- 
casion of error and sin: that he has reason and 
conscience to direct the conduct of life, which 
may yet be neglected, perverted and misguide 
ed: that with all these together, he is equally 
capable of right or wrong, and as free to the 
one as to the other.* 

Unitarians reject the doctrine of justification 
by the merits of Christ. To quote authorities in 
support of this charge is needless. All their 
leading writers declare, without ceremony, that 
the sufferings, the blood, and the righteousness 
of Jesus Christ, are nothing more, as to the 
point of our personal acceptance with God, than 
those of any other man. They assert that the 

* See Priestly and Bflsham- — And also Professor Ware's 
Letters, p. 20, 21. 



.28 



LETTER I, 



PRACTICE OF VIRTUE is the ONLY GROUND OF 

mope; and that any other plan of justification is 
unscriptural an<J absurd. 

They believe that all the human race will 
family be saved. This was D r. 'Priestley's opin- 
ion. Mr. Belsham also expresses himself on 
the subject in the following terms: "We may 
Vt certainly conclude that none of the crea- 
u ?ures of Gob, in any circumstances, will 
u be eternally miserable. The wicked will 
a indeed be raised to suffering; but since eteiv 
& nal misery, for temporary crime, is inconsist- 
ent with every principle of justice, we are 
u naturally led to conclude, that the sufferings 
"of the wicked will be remedial, and that they 
"will terminate in a complete purification from 
^ moral disorder, and in their ultimate restora* 
u tion to virtue and happiness."* The truth is, 
that although the Unitarian Purgatory differs 
in several respects from that of the Papists, it is 3 
nevertheless, as real a Purgatory; having 
the same substantial characters, and being equal- 
ly opposedjo the whole current of scripture. 

* Review of Wilberforce, &c* Letter th 



LETTER I. 



29 



Finally; the Unitarians reject the inspiration 
of the Scriptures. "The scriptures," says Dr. 
Priestly, were written without "any partic- 
6 ular inspiration, by men who wrote accord- 
" ing to the best of their knowledge, and who, 
"from their circumstance:?, could not be mista- 
" ken with respect to the greater facts of which 
"they were proper witnesses; but (like other 
"men subject to prejudice) might be liable to 
"adopt a hasty and ill-grounded opinion 
"concerning things which did not fall within the 
"compass of their own knowledge."* Mr. 
Belsham very explicitely tells us, that "The 
"scriptures contain a very faithful and credible 
" account of the Christian doctrine, which is the 
"true word of God; but they are not them- 
"selves the word of God; nor do they ever as- 
"sume that title: and it is highly improper to 
" speak of them as such, as it leads inattentive 
"readers to suppose they are written under a 
" plenary inspiration, to which they make 
" no pretension. "t 

To this list of Unitarian opinions, I might 
add, if it were necessary, a number of othej? 

* History of early Opinions, IV* p. 4. 5. 
| Review } &c. Letter I. 

3* 



so 



LETTER I. 



ariicles; such as the materiality of the soul; — the 
consequent denial ef a separate state, of activity 
or even consciousness, between death and the 
resurrection-,— the denial of the existence of 
either Devils or good Angels; and the rejection 
of all sanctity in the Sabbath. But my limits 
forbid me to multiply particulars; and I would 
by no means allow myself to do any thing that 
might look like unduly darkening the horrid 
picture. 

From this summary view, it is evident that 
Unitarianism, according to the statement of 
one of its most zealous friends in the United 
States, consists "rather in not believing;" 
and that the principle difficulty which it has to 
encounter is to "make men zealous in refusing 
"to believe."* It is plain, also, that Unita- 
rians reject every one of what we deem the 
peculiar and essential doctrines of the Gos- 
pel. According lo this scheme, there is no other 
than a mere human, fallible, and peccable Sa* 
viour; no real redemption by the blood of Christ; 
no justification by his merits; no Holy Spirit 
to sanctify our depraved nature; no prevailing 

* J\Ir. Wells's Letter, contained in a "Brief History of 
the Progress and Present State of the Unitarian Churches 
in America" 



LETTER X 



31 



Intercessor; nothing that can with propriety be 
called grace: all — all is figurative, cold, inade- 
quate and unsatisfying. 

In short, Christianity, if Unitarianism be the 
truth, is nothing more than a republication of 
the religion of nature, with very small addition- 
al light. A future state, a pure morality, and the 
efficacy of repentance, form the sum total of its 
discoveries; and men are left, after all, to ac 
complish their own salvation. 

I repeat, that you are by no means to under- 
stand me as asserting, that all Unitarians adopt 
every one of these opinions. But I have no 
doubt that they are all adopted by the general^ 
ty of that denomination. Be not deceived, then, 
when the charge is denied, ever so strongly, by 
individuals^ who wish to avoid the odium of 
sentiments which are found shocking to popular 
feeling. The question is, not whether some 
who call themselves, and who deserve to be 
called, Unitarians, believe every article in the 
list which I have given; but whether the lead- 
ers of their sect, at present, in Europe and 
America^ do not, substantially, so believe \ and 



82 



LETTER L 



whether the spirit of their system does not g# 
the whole length of my statement. 

Such, then, is Unitarianism. How far it dif- 
fers from Deism, I leave you to judge. Mr. 
Belsham, who is now at the head of the Unita- 
rians in England, gives it as his opinion, that 
Uiuiarianism differs with respect to no import- 
ant doctrine from the system of the deistical 
Theophilanthropists of France* Speaking of 
those Deists, he explicitly says, c, Their profes- 
;t sed principles comprehend the essence of 
u the Christian religion.''* And, truly, I can 
recollect no feature of the Christian religion ad- 
mitted by Unitarians, which is not substantially 
admitted by serious Deists, except the divine 
mission of Jesus Christ, and the resurrection of 
the body; and both these are maintained by 
Mohammedans. It follows, then, that they reject 
all the peculiar doctrines of Christianity. — 
Now the question which you are called upon to 
decide, is, whether those who occupy this ground 
are Christians, and ought to be acknowledged 
as such? And it is a question which can hardly 
fail of coming home to your consciences almost 

* Review, p. 217. 



LETTER I 



every day that you live. You reside in the 
midst of Unitarians. They are daily thrown 
into your company. They converse on their 
favourite opinions. Their publications are con- 
tinually offered for your perusal: and you are 
often tempted, if not solicited, to attend on their 
preaching. The questions, then, how you ought 
to estimate their opinions; how to treat their 
persons-, how to act with regard to their publi- 
cations; how to consider their preaching; 
whether you ought to regard them as Christians 
at all; whether their congregations ought to be 
called churches of Christ: and whether the or- 
dinances which they administer, ought to be sus« 
tained as valid? — are questions which you must 
decide, at least practically. You cannot evade 
them. If you forbear to answer them in words, 
you must and will answer them by your actions. 
It is my confident hope that you will not attempt 
to evade a decision; and it is my earnest desire 
to aid you in deciding these momentous ques- 
tions in such a manner as God and your own con- 
sciences shall approve, 

The slightest glance at the subject will enable 
you to perceive that this is no sectarian dispute* 



-84 



LETTER I. 



It is not a controversy between Presbyterians 
and Episcopalians, or between Cahinists and 
Jtrminians* in which men may take different 
sides, and yet be equally safe with regard to 
their eternal prospects. Although I am a deci- 
ded Calvinist, yet it would never occur to me 
to place the peculiarities of the Calvinistick 
creed among the fundamentals of our common 
Christianity. While it is impossible for me to 
be satisfied myself with a theological system 
which does not include them; I find no difficulty 
in embracing as brethren in Christ, many who 
do not view them with the same eyes. But the 
controversy between the Orthodox and Unitari* 
ans, is of more vital and awful import. It 
is a controversy which relates to nothing 
less than the Object of our worship, and the 
Foundation of our hope. It is a controversy 
which involves a question of no less import than 
this:— How you will regard the character and 
principles of those who would take away your 
God and Saviour; who would tear from Chris- 
tianity, not merely some important parts, but 
the sum total of its essence; that which 
alone renders it a religion adapted to the case 
of miserable sinners? I cannot suppose that yoa 



LETTER f. 



will feel at a loss, for a moment, how this ques- 
tion ought to be answered. I trust that every 
feeling of your hearts, as weil as every dictate 
of yo-ir understandings, will furnish a prompt 
and decisive reply. 

My dear Brethren! In the Father, the Son, 
and the Holy Ghost, the one living a;;d true 
God, the God of the Bible, whom Unitarians re- 
ject, your Fathers believed. In the name of the 
ever blessed and undivided Trinity, you have all 
been baptized. In this adorable Trinity, the 
true Church of God in all ages, as we shall see 
in the sequel, have steadfastly confided and re- 
joiced. May I not take for granted that a doc- 
trine so obviously interesting, and so long the 
hope of the pious, will not be, by any who have 
been educated in the belief of it, lightly or 
hastily discarded? May I not cherish the assu- 
ranee that you will inquire long, and deliberate 
seriously, before you will abandon your Fa- 
ther's God? Thus saith the Lord, stand ye in 
the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, 
where is the good way, and walk therein^ and 
ye shall find rest for your souls** 

Jeremiah VI. 1& 



LETTER 11, 



Prejudices cherished by many against Orthodoxy — - 1 haP 
Orthodoxy is austere and repulsive — 7 hat it lays tod 
much stress on opinions — That it is a spirit of perse- 
cution. 

Christian Brethren, 

In entering on the discussion of the points in 
controversy between the Orthodox and Unitari- 
ans, there are some popular Prejudices, 
which continually meet us, and which seldom 
fail to exert an unfavourable influence on the 
minds of many persons who profess to be seek* 
ing the truth on this subject. I need not say 
that a Prejudice is an opinion taken up without 
solid reason or inquiry, and adhered to rather 
from feeling than from enlightened judgment. 
Nor is it necessary to remark, that prejudices 
ought to be carefully avoided. No man in his 
senses will be willing to commit himself delib- 
erately to their guidance-, yet nothing is more 



LETTER II. 



n 



common than to be under this guidance, even on 
the most important of all subjects. And per- 
haps it may be said with truth that there are no 
points on which men are more peculiarly apt to 
give themselves up to the government of preju- 
dices, than on those which are now under con- 
sideration; because there are none on which the 
feelings of the corrupt heart are more apt to 
rise in arms. It shall be my endeavour, in this 
and the next Letter, to put you on your guard 
against some of these prejudices, and to engage 
those who have hitherto indulged them, to in- 
quire impartially before they proceed further in 
this course. 

I. The first that I shall mention in this 
catalogue of Prejudices, is, "That the Or* 

" THODOX SYSTEM IS AUSTERE AND REPUL- 

"sive; that it gives gloomy and discouraging 
a views of human nature; and that the whole 
" method of restoration to the favour aud en- 
joyment of God which it exnibits, is hu- 
"miliating and melancholy: while Unitarian- 
" ism, on the contrary, represents the con- 
" dition of man as much more favourable, 
a his danger as far less 5 his duty as more 

a 



38 



LETTER II. 



44 easy and pleasant, and the whole aspect of 
4i religion as more attractive." — "I always 
44 feel,*" said a gay, worldly hearer, "I ai- 
rways feel easy and comfortable when I listen 
s, to the sermons and prayers of Unitarians. 
"There is nothing to hurt the feelings; nothing 
44 to excite alarm; nothing to make me displeas- 
44 ed with myself. But when I attend on the 
44 ministry of the Orthodox, I am constantly ren- 
4i dered uneasy by the views which they give of 
44 the condition of man, dissatisfied and anxious 
41 about myself, and discouraged at their state? 
4i ment of what is necessary to salvation. From 
44 the one I can always come away with a smile 
44 and a light heart; from the other, if I have 
44 listened at all, I seldom fail of coming away 
"trembling at my danger, full of self-reproach, 
u and feeling as if some serious and immediate 
• 4 measures were indispensable to my safety.'" — - 
Such was the substance of the frank confession 
of an individual; but the feeling which dictated 
it, is doubtless that of thousands. 1 am confi- 
dent that many, for this very reason, deliberate- 
ly prefer going to Unitarian places of worship: 
and have little doubt that others, as deliberately, 
resolve to cast in their lot permanently with thak 



LETTER II. 



3S 



denomination, rather in obedience to the feeling 
which has been just described, than as the result 
of careful, or even serious inquiry. 

But, I ask, is it reasonable, is it justifiable, 
upon any principle, to yield to a prejudice of 
this kind? Is that which is most palatable al- 
ways most salutaryl Ought a wayward child to 
take for granted that that plan of education is 
the wisest and best, which is most lax and indul- 
gent, most agreeable to his present feelings, and 
from which all painful restraint and discipline 
are excluded? Ought a sick man to conclude 
hastily that a certain physician is more skilful 
than any other, merely because he constantly 
deals in soothing and palliatives, and never ad- 
ministers the remedy, which, while it would 
give temporary pain, would also remove his dis- 
ease? No; every one would say, that the folly, 
in both these cases, was extreme. Now, we are* 
all wayward children; and we cannot be reclaim- 
ed and led in the right way without painful 
discipline. We are all morally diseased; and 
remedies at present painful are necessary to our 
restoration. Should we not call that man infat- 
uated, who desired to be soothed, flattered, and 



40 



LETTER II. 



made easy, for a few days, at the expense of 
years of extreme suffering? Surely, no less pal- 
pable is the infatuation of that man, who is most 
pleased with those who flatter and set him at 
ease in his sins; who resolves, anteriour to all 
examination, to throw himself into the arms of 
those who tell him the most gratifying story, 
and predict most favourably, concerning his situ- 
ation and eternal prospects. 

It is undoubtedly true, that the Orthodox uni- 
formly represent man as a sinner, a fallen, lost, 
miserable sinner; as guilty, and standing in 
need of pardon; as polluted, and standing in 
ne^d of regenerating and sanctifying grace; as 
labouring, in his whole constitution, under a 
deplorable disease, from which he can obtain 
deliverance only through the atoning blood, and 
purifying Spirit of an Almighty Redeemer. 
And it is equally true, that they always repre- 
sent the course of a sinner's return to God, and 
of holy obedience to his commands, as a much 
more humiliating, spiritual, difficult, self-deny- 
ing course, than Unitarians represent it. On 
this diversity of representation, the first ques- 
tion that would occur to a wise man, is, How is 



LETTER IL 



4: 



this matter to be decided? Is it by the word of 
God, or by the assertions of fallible men? If by 
the word of God, what does that unerring guide 
say on the subject? To the law and to the testi- 
mony: if they speak not according to this word^ 
it is because there is no light in them. 

I ask you, then, my Brethren, and I entreat 
you to ask yourselves in the fear of God, with 
which of these representations do the sacred 
Scriptures, both in their letter and spirit, best 
accord? Do they teach man that he is in a state 
of spiritual health; that his nature is pure; 
that he stands in no need of the regenerating, 
and sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit; that 
he can purchase pardon, if he should ever hap- 
pen to need it, by his own works; that he has 
inherent strength to perform all that God re- 
quires; that he has no hell, or a verv trivial one, 
to fear; and that final happiness will be attained 
by every man, however disobedient? Do the 
Scriptures teach thus? Do they thus throw the 
Saviour and the Holy Spirit into the shade, 
and make salvtaion an unmeaning term? Or do 
they teach directly the reverse of all this? Let 
not your feelings decide these questions. This 
3* 



42 



LETTER II. 



would be like making a culprit at the bar both 
juror and judge in his own case. But let en- 
lightened, impartial conscience, with the word of 
God in your hands, give the answer. What will 
it avail you, in the great day of trial, to find that 
you have been flattered by blind leaders of the 
blind, and have set at nought the plain, repeat- 
ed, solemn declarations of that word, which 
was given to guide you into the way of peace. 
and which will be the great standard of judg- 
ment in that day? 

But is the system of the Unitarians really 
more favourable to comfort of mind than that of 
the Orthodox? "Is that system "gloomy' 5 and 
4i full of horrors,*' which directs the guilty and 
"burdened mind to a Saviour, who is described 
"by the inspiration of God, as able to save to 
"the uttermost; or that which must consign 
" us to all the miseries of despondency and des- 
"pair, by representing this Saviour as a mere 
"man — a fallible, peccable man — a man liable to 
" igno ranee, prejudice and sin?'' Is not the latter, 
in fact, like every other deceiver, though smiling 
-and flattering in its aspect, utterly hostile to true 
enjoyment? Read the Xllth of the excellent 



LETTER IL 



43 



Letters of Dr. Fuller, on the Cakinistick and 
Socinian Systems compared; and I have no 
doubt you will be fully convinced that the system 
of the Orthodox is, in every view, most friendly 
to peace of conscience, to habitual tranquility 
and cheerfulness of mind, and to that genuine 
spiritual joy, which flows from the richest conso- 
lations, and the purest and most exalted hopes* 
Like a faithful phjsician, it wounds but to heal; 
like a precious medicine of life, it gives tempo- 
rary pain, but to produce infinitely more than a 
counterbalance of health and comfort in the end, 
It is not, indeed, and it is one of its glories that 
it is not, friendly to carnal and grovelling joys; 
to those which are connected with the theatre, 
the card-table, the midnight revel, or any scene 
of unhallowed sensuality. It boasts of no pow- 
er to place men at ease in their sins, or to say, 
Peace, peace, when there is no peace. On the 
contrary, it ever tends to make wicked men 
deeply anxious and apprehensive, as they ought 
to be. It allows none to be tranquil and happy 
but those who have forsaken sin, and become 
true penitents and believers in Christ. But to 
the humble, the contrite, and the obedient be- 
liever, it speaks peace, and comfort, and blessed- 



44 



LETTER If. 



ness: it presents a foundation of hope of the 
most firm and ample kind; it elevates the soul 
with the assurance of God's love; impaFts to it 
a peace which passeth all understanding, and 
spreads before it the most animating and trans- 
forming prospects for the life to come. I do 
consider the undoubted fact, that Unitarian- 
ism allows all classes of men, even those against 
whom the word of God denounces the most aw- 
ful threatenings, to dismiss all anxiety about 
their condition, and to live at ease, as one of the 
most conclusive symptoms of its anti-christian 
character. That system cannot be of God, 
which, in proportion as it takes more full pos- 
session of the mind, renders it more firmly at- 
tached to worldly pursuits and pleasures, more 
at ease in a licentious course, less inclined to the 
duties of devotion, and more reluctant to think 
of death and ternity. "I should like," said 
one of the shrewdest men in our country, on be- 
ing asked, after his return from hearing the most 
popular Unitarian preacher then in Boston, how 
he was pleased with him, "I should like," said 
he, "always to hear such preaching, if I were 
4 isure I was never to die." 



BETTER II. 



45 



If. A second Prejudice against which I 
Wish to .put you on your guard, is expressed in 
rarious terms; but the substance of it is, "that 
the Orthodox attach too much impor- 
'* tance to the points in controversy be- 

* TWEEN THEM AtfD THE UNITARIANS." Man J" 

are willing to allow that Unitarians are wrong- 
sadly wrong; — but that they should be regard- 
ed as so essentially wrong, as to endanger 
their eternal salvation, to preclude all ecclesias- 
tical intercourse with them, and even to render 
it improper to give them the name of Chris- 
tian; — they consider as going by much too far; 
as a sort of theological extravagance, rather fit- 
ted to exasperate feelings, and make infidels, 
than promote the cause of truth and charity. 
Accordingly, the minds of such persons are not a 
little wounded, when they hear the errors of 
Unitarians denounced as "dreadful 5 ' and "soul- 
•* destroying." They imagine that more mild 
and inoffensive language would better accord 
with the spirit of the Gospel. These impres- 
sions, in many, are rendered still more deep and 
unfavourable, when they observe that Unitari- 
ans commonly profess to speak a very different 
language; that they plume themselves on their 



46 



LETTER IL 



"liberality that they profess to be ever ready 
to respect as pious, and to receive to the arms 
of their "charity, 55 all classes of men who as- 
sume the Christian name; and that they consider 
no difference whatever, on the score of doctrine, 
as sufficient to preclude ecclesiastical communion. 

Before you allow yourselves, my Christian 
Brethren, to countenance, in the least degree, 
this prejudice, I beg your candid attention to a 
few remarks, which I hope will convince you, 
that the common cry against the Orthodox, of 
" U^ T CHARITABLEXESS, ,, is one of the most un- 
founded and unreasonable that ever obtained 
currency in a deluded world. 

I am sensible that we are not, in all cases, 
capable of deciding what doctrines are to be 
considered as absolutely essential to Chris- 
tianity, and what doctrines, though important, 
are of secondary moment. Hence the wisest 
and profoundest divines have always regarded 
the task of making a list of the fundamental 
truths of religion, as a very delicate and difficult 
one. But with respect to some doctrines, there 
can be no hesitation in deciding, that if there 



LETTER II. 



47 



be any such thing as fundamental truth?, these 
belong to the number. Of this number, the 
Orthodox have always been persuaded. i? the 
doctrine of the tnie and proper Divinity of uie 
Lord Jesus Christ. Those who admit this doc- 
trine, and build their whole system upon it 5 and 
those who totally reject it, can nevei worship or 
commune toge her. [t will be easy. I thi ok. to 
make it appear thit they are of different reli- 
gions; and tha# to consider it in any other light^ 
is a perversion of reason as well as of scripture. 

The Orthodot assuredly believe, that man is 
a guilty, depraved and ruined creature, by na= 
ture as well as by practice. They believe that 
there is no other way by which he can regain 
the favour and image of his Maker, than by the 
atoning blood, and sanctifying Spirit of the eter- 
nal Son of God. They are persuaded, moreover, 
that it is the union of Divinity and humanity in 
the adorable Person of the Sa viour, that makes 
his atoning sacrifice infinitely meritorious, and 
that stamps infinite sufficiency, efficacy, and 
glory on his righteousness. And they believe, 
with equal confidence, that without an humble 
and cordial reception of this great Mediator, as 



48 



LETTER IL 



the Lord our righteousness, and the Lord our 
strength, as the foundation of our hope, and the 
life of our souls, there is no vital union to Him; 
po interest in his atonement; no salvation. But 
all this Unitarians reject as a vain delusion, and 
denounce as gross idolatry. In their view, man 
stands in no need of a Redeemer, and Jesus 
Christ is nothing more than a mere human teach- 
er. Now I ask, can these two parties consider 
their points of difference as of a minor sort, or re- 
concileable? When the question is, whether the 
Saviour in whom I put my trust, is a Divine 
being, or only a man, like myself; whether He 
is a mere creature, or the uncreated God, the 
Maker and Governor of all worlds; whether 
He is to be honoured and worshipped as my 
Almighty Deliverer from sin and death, or only 
respected as a mere human preacher of mercy — = 
when these are the questions to be asked, can 
those who answer them not only differently, 
but pPFosfTELY, be of the same religion, or 
worship in the same temple? Impossible! The 
objects of their worship are different; the 
grounds of their confidence are different; the 
wh !e current of their exercises, and of their 
language, in contemplating and in seeking 



LETTER II. 



Salvation, must be entirely different. I^hey wht 
adopt the erroneous side, substitute another 
Gospel, nay, it is not too much to say, another 
God, in place of the Gospel and the God of the 
Bible. As well might light and darkness be 
expected to agree. Either the Orthodox must 
be involved in the dreadful guilt of worshipping 
a creature instead of the Creator; or the Uni- 
tarians in the no less shocking guilt of denying 
the Lord that bought us, and habitually blas- 
pheming that Name which is above every name. 
Can this difference be a matter of small mo- 
ment? Is it easy, nay, is it possible to "make too 
44 much" of it— to "attach too much impor- 
tance" to it? I could just as soon believe that 
the points in controversy between the Christian 
and the Atheist are trivial matters, and that 
both might, with perfect comfort, worship in the 
same sanctuary 5 and commune at the same table ! 

Before any one, then, can reasonably find 
fault with the O-thodox for laying too much 
stress on the opinions in controversy between 
them and Unitarians, he must first assume as a 
conceded fact that thje opinions of *the Orthodox 
mre false* Forlf they are admitted to be true, 

i 



LETTER IL 



(and surely the Orthodox believe them fo be so) 
then all the important consequences which we 
contemplate must, demonstrably, flow from them. 
If the children of men be lost and perishing sin- 
ners; — if we essentially need pardon and sane* 
iification; — if the eternal Son of God became 
incarnate that he might be made an atci ii g 
sacrifice for our sins; — if there be no other 
way in which forgiveness and purity can be im- 
parted to us, than by the obedience, the suffer- 
ings, and the Spirit of an Almighty Redeemer; 
—if the plan of salvation adopted by infinite 
Wisdom be a plan, not of works, but of mere 
grace; — and if we must receive it with humble 
gratitude, as a system of grace, or perish; — ; 
then, I ask, do we attach unwarrantable impor- 
tance to these truths, when we represent the 
Feception of them as essential to salvation, and 
consider those who reject them as unworthy of 
the Christian name? If they be true, all this 
follows of course* "Let none persuade you 
A(t then, my friends, that the doctrine of the 
64 Trinity is a matter of curiosity and specu- 
lation only. Our religion is founded upon 7 
a ; it. For what is Chi -istianiij but a manifesta- 
« lion of the three Divine Persons as engaged in 



LETTER IL 



"the great work of man's redemption, begun 
" continued, and to be ended by them, in their 
" several relations of Father, Son and Holy 
" Ghost; Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier; 
" three Persons in one God? If there be no Son 
"of God, where is our Redemption? If there 
"be no Hoiy Spirit, where is our Sanctify 
"cation? Without both, where is our Sal- 
tation? And if these two Persons be any 
" thing less than Divine, why are we baptized 
" equally in the name of the Father, and of the 
"Son, nnd of the Holy Ghost? Let no man* 
" therefore, deceive you. This is the true God 
" and eternal life"* 

Accordingly, let me entreat you. my Breth* 
ren, to appeal to the unerring Word of God, and 
see whether the true doctrine concerning the 
Person and work of Christ, is not there repre- 
sented as that great fundamental matter, on 
which the whole fabrick of Christianity, and all 
our hopes for eternity must rest. The Saviour 
himself expressly declares, that all men should 
honour the Son even as they honour the Father* 
He that honoureth not the Son, honour eth not the 



? Bishop Horse's Discourses on the Trinity, 



LETTER It 



Father which hath sent him* The Apostle Pe- 
ter speaks thus — But there were false prophets- 
mlso among the people, even as there shall be false 
prophets among you, who privily shall bring in 

DAMNABLE HERESIES, 6Ve?l DENTING THE LOR» 

that bought them, and bring upon themselves 
swift destruction.! The Apostle Johni 
amidst all the tenderness and benevolence which 
so strikingly characterize his writings, declares 

—He that abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, 
hath not God; he that abideth in the doctrine 
of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Soiu 
If there come any unto you, and bring not this 
doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither 
hid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God 
speed,, is a partaker of his evil deeds.% Asain, 
it is said, who is a liar, but he that denieth that 
Jesus is the Christ? Whosoever denieth the Son, 
the same hath not the Father^ Again, another 
inspired Apostle pronounces, As zee said before^ 
so say I now again, If any man preach any other 
gospel unto you than that ye have received, let 
him be accur$ed.\\ Again, we are assured, Other 
foundation can no man lay but that which is laid. 

*John r. 22. 23. f II. Peter if. 1. t IL John 9. - 
{ I. John II. 2.2. 23* [| Gaiatians h 9 



LETTER II. 



which is Jesus Christ;* and concerning himself 
our blessed Lord solemnly pronounces, If ye be- 
lieve not that I am he, ye shall die in your sin&A 
— Now, whatever doubt may exist as to the im- 
port of these passages in other respects, one 
thing is plain. They unquestionably teach that 
the true doctrine concerning Christ is essential 
to Christianity, and that a rejection of it is 
nothing less than an anti-christian departure 
from the faith. 

Let not, then, the charge of want of "chari- 
u ty," or laying a "bigotted" and unreasonable 
stress on a particular set of opinions, alarm you. 
As long as you are borne out by the word of 
God, you may be perfectly content under char- 
ges of this kind. Why should we disguise the 
truth, or deceive ourselves or others concerning 
this matter? Why should we be led away, under 
the pretence cf "liberality" or ;i benevolence," 
to give up that which is essential to the life of 
our souls? Is it real "charity" to our fellow 
men to allow them to be hoodwinked and deceiv- 
ed, nay, directly to help to blind and embolden 
them, in rushing on to their own destruction? 

* L Cor, ILL 11. f John VIII. 24, 
5* 



54 



LETTER II. 



Is it real "charity" to tell men that an error 
is non-essential, and that there is no danger in 
adopting it, when Jehovah has pronounced that 
it is "damnable," and brings upon those who 
adopt it, "swift destruction?" O my Friends, 
the folly of desiring Ministers to prophecy smooth 
things in such a case, is of the most extreme and 
wonderful kind! To give the name of christian 
"benevolence" and "charity" to conduct which 
is calculated eternally to destroy all who are 
influenced by it, is, of all perversions, both of 
language and of principle, one of the most enor- 
mous! 

Nor let it be forgotten, while we are on this 
branch of the subject, that Unitarians themselves 
were once accustomed to speak a very different 
language, on the points in controversy between 
them anft the Orthodox, from that which they 
now commonly employ. Now they endeavour 
to make you believe that the questions in dis- 
pute between them are not fundamental; that 
they are matters of doubtful speculation, about 
which good men may entertain very different 
©pinions, without separating from each other. 
But they have not been always in the habit of 



LETTER lh 



55 



speaking thus: and I am persuaded I do them 
no injustice when I express a suspicion, that 
they sometimes, at least, speak thus to serve a 
turn. Formerly they were accustomed to main- 
tain, that the doctrines of the Divinity of Christ, 
and of the Trinity in Unity, ought to be consid- 
ered, not only as the most outrageous of all 
absurdities, but as among the most pestiferous of 
all errors; that they are directly contrary to 
every sound principle of natural and revealed 
religion: that those who embrace them, make 
more Gods than one; that they are guilty of a 
shocking breach of the first Commandment, and 
are chargeable with the sin of gross idolatry* 
This was the habitual language of the Unitari- 
ans, until within a few years. Faustus Socinus 
himself speaks on the subject in this strain. 
Though he believed Christ to be a mere man, 
yet he maintained, with the most ardent zeal, 
that he ought to be worshipped. He expressly 
says, that, "to deny worship to him, is not a 
"simple error, or a mere mistake; but a most 
w pernicious error; an error which leads to Ju« 
"daism, and is, in effect, denying Christ; that 
€i it tends to Epicurianism, and even to Atke- 
* ism." And to shew that he was really in 



LETTER II. 



earnest, in believing as he taught, he and his 
friend Blandr&ta persecuted poor Davidies, in a 
manner which issued in his miserable death, 
because he could not be brought to teach or ad- 
mit, as they did, that a mere man ought to be 
worshipped. Smalcius. another Socinian, ex- 
pressly says, that the) are no Christians who 
refuse to give divine worship to Christ. And, 
in the spirit of these declarations, some of the 
most distinguished English Unitarians have, 
within a few years, used language quite as de* 
cisive and "uncharitable" as any that the most 
thorough-going Calvinists have ever employed. 
They have called upon their followers to "come 
"out from Babylon;" to "separate themselves 
"from idolaters;" have publickly declared that 
the separation of Unitarians from Trinitarians 
is as obviously proper and necessary as was the 
separation of Protestants from the church of 
Rome; and they have not scrupled to stigma- 
tize the Orthodox continually as "Polytheists," 
"Idolaters," "Blasphemers," &c* This is 
"laying stress" Xvith a witness on doctrinal 
opinions! It is hoped that no Unitarian, here- 
after, will ever find fault v> i th the Orthodox for 
considering the Divinity and worship of Christ 



LETTER ft, 



57 



ag essentials in the Gospel of his grace, and for 
ma intaining that they are no Christians who 
reject them. 

Dr. Priestly himself says, "If there ever 
" was any such thing as idolatry, it is paying 
"religious worship to any other than the one 
"only living and true God; and if it be of any 
" consequence to preserve inviolate the first ar* 
"tide of all revealed religion, viz. the unity 
"of God, and the exclusive worship of Him, 
" (which was the one great object of the Jewish 
"religion, and continues to be so in the Chris- 
" tian) it must be incumbent upon us to frequent 
"no society of Christians, however pious and 
" sincere they may be, if we be convinced they 
5fc err in so essential an article of faith as this. 
" It is innocent in them who are ignorant, and 
"act agreeably to their consciences; but it is 
"criminal in us who know better. There are, 
" no doubt, differences in lesser matters, which 
"may be borne with in members of the same 
"society; but if any difference in opinion and 
"practice will justify a separation, it must 
"be this. That such a corrupt mode of reli- 
"giw is enjoined by the civil powers under 



LETTER IL 



14 which #e live, will no more authorize or ex- 
"cuse our t couformiry to it, than the same con- 
siderations, would have justified the priftii- 
" tive Christians in conforming to the rites of 
"the Pagan worship, which were ei joined by 
"the laws of the Roman empire. The answer 
46 of the Apostles, Peter and John, to the Jewish 
"High Priest, should be adopted by all chris- 
tians: We ought to obey God rather than 
" man."* 

It is true that modern Unitarians, while they 
adopt this language, profess to feel kindly to* 
wards their orthodox neighbours, and not to 
suppose that their opinions will be destructive 
of their final safety: nay, some Unitarians do 
not even deny the christian character of the or- 
thodox, on account of their alledged idolatry. 
Bat how this is to be accounted for, I will not 
undertake to decide; unless, indeed, it be suppo* 
sed, as I am rather inclined to think, with the late 
excellent Mr. Fuller, we ought to suppose, that 
" no reason can be assigned for it, excepting their 

* Introductory Essay to Forms of Prayer for the use of 
Unitarian Societies. 8 vo. 1783, 



LETTER II. 



m 



41 indifference to truth, and the deistical turn of 
44 their sentiments."* 

Unitarians, indeed, pretty generally disclaim 
the union, that any particular belief is neces- 
sary to salvation: and, in truth, it must so, 
for they are generally believers in the doctrine 
of universal salvation* Such persons are, of 
course, persuaded that no departure from the 
truth, either in faith or practice, not even athe- 
ism itself, or the most fiend like abominations in 
conduct, can eternally destroy any one. But I 
leave you to say, now this opinion can be recon- 
ciled with such declarations as the following-** 
If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in 
your sins. He that hath the Son hath life; but 
he that hath not the Son, hath not life. He that 
believeth on the Son of God hath everlasting life, 
and shall not come into condemnation, but is pass* 
ed from death untG life; but he that believeth not 
on the Son of God, shall not see life, but the 
wrath of God abideth upon him, 

As to the suggestion sometimes made, espe- 
cially by weak and superficial writers,, that con- 
fidently believing and pronouncing the reception 

* Fuller's Calvinistick and Socinian systems compared? 
Letter 10th. 



LETTER II. 



of certain opinions necessary to salvation, i& 
Tolves a claim approaching, if not amounting, to 
something like papal infallibility; it is really too 
silly to need a ibrmal refutation. The plain im- 
port of the suggestion, is neither more nor less 
than this, that humbly to credit God's word, and 
to believe and pronounce that to be necessary 
to salvation, which the great Author of salvation 
has declared to be so, is presumptuojsly seUing 
up our own notions as an infallible rule of faith* 
If this be reasonable, or if it deserve any respect- 
ful name, I know not what deserve* to be con- 
sidered as supremely preposterous. If 1 know 
what the most arrogant, daring* impious assump- 
tion of more than "papal infallibility'^ of which 
fallen man is capable, is, it is undertaking to 
pronounce (hat a trifle which the infinite God 
has pronounced all-important; and that unessen- 
tial to the safety of man, which He has declared 
to be the foundation of all christian hope. 

III. A third Prejudice, closely allied with 
the preceding, is, "that undertaking to denounce 
u Unitarianism, as not only a dangerous, but alsd 
n a destructive heresy; and to exclude those who 
^embrace it from our communion, and all 



LETTER II, 



" ecclesiastical intercourse, is really nothing less 
u than persecution; and if so, contrary to the 
" spirit of the Gospel. That we should have 
cur own private thoughts of any system of here- 
sy, and should privately warn against its fasci- 
nations, those with whom we may have influence, 
is acknowledged by most persons to be a chris- 
tian right; but that we should publickly, openly, 
and continually, hold up a particular heresy^ 
from the pulpit and the press, as anti-christum 
and destructive, and thus habitually endeavour to 
draw upon it the abhorrence of all who believe 
our representations, is considered, even by some 
who are not willing to be accounted friends of 
the heresy in question, as partaking of the na- 
ture of that spirit of persecution, which, as pro- 
tectants, we all profess to reprobate. But this 
is a mere prejudice, which a little consideration 
will serve effectually to remove. 

What is persecution, as applied to the subject 
of religion? It is pursuing men with personal 
malignity and bitterness, subjecting them to ci- 
vil penalties, and offering violence to their per- 
£ons or property, on account of their religious 
Opinions, Happily the government under whick 

6 



LETTER IL 



God has cast cur lot, does not admit of subject- 
ing any man to civil penalties on account of his 
religion, unless that religion lead him to disturb 
the peace of society. No violence can be offered 
either to the person or the property of any one, 
for any modification of religious belief, however 
shocking, as long as he remains a quiet, orderly 
citizen. Of persecution such as this, no person, 
it is presumed, in our country, has any reason 
to complain. But, supposing we may call, — as I 
believe we may call — that man persecuted, who, 
on account of his religious opinions, is loaded 
with calumny and abuse, hunted down with slan- 
der and reproachful names; and either shut out 
from the offices of social kindness, or driven from 
his residence, by the unrelenting intolerance of 
public opinion. In short, where personal or 
social vengeance is wreaked on the person of a 
supposed heretick, instead of a decent refuta- 
tion of his opinions; or where even his opinions 
are visited with a violence and outrage, incon- 
sistent with the laws of christian benevolence — 
there is "persecution."' Publick sentiment, 
and individual abuse, may, no doubt, as really 
persecute, as the magistrate, whtr spills the blood ? 
incarcerates the body, or seizes the property of 



LETTER II. 63 

an alledged heretick. But is any individual or 
community in our country, chargeable with per- 
secution even of this kind? I know of no exam- 
ple of it; and, unless I am deceived, should be 
as ready to join in heartily condemning it 5 as any 
Unitarian in the land. 

Is it "persecution" to pronounce a set of opin- 
ions unscriptural, and destructive to the souls of 
men, if we really think them so? Is it "perse* 
"cation" to warn those around us against a here- 
sy which we unfeignedly believe that the Holy 
Ghost hath pronounced "damnable?" Then- no 
man can preach the gospel With fidelity without 
being a persecutor. Nay, if this be so, no one of 
the inspired Apostles ever did preach it without 
laying himself open to this charge. In short, if 
this principle be admitted, it is persecution to 
warn our neighbours against a prowling thief, a 
secret incendiary, or a midnight assassin. But 
can any man reconcile such a doctrine with 
scripture, or even common sense? In denoun- 
cing Unitarianism, then, and in opposing it with 
scriptural weapons, we humbly conceive, we are 
not liable to the charge of persecution. We do 
not offer personal violence to its advocates. We 



LETTER 8. 



have no desire to injure them in their secular 
business, or to deprive them of a single comfort 
in society. We should think ourselves guilty of 
a baseness unworthy of the cause which we 
plead, where we to assail their private characters % 
or direct toward their persons the language of re- 
proach. On the contrary, we consider it as our 
duty to perform to them every office of christian 
benevolence; to be careful of their good name: 
and to be ready to promote their temporal and 
eternal welfare, by all the means in our power. 
Nay, while we disclaim ail hostility to their per- 
sons, we oppose even their opinions with no other 
weapons than those of scripture and argument. 
Must we, notwithstanding, be still branded as 
"persecutors?" Musi it still be often more 
than intimated, that nothing but the "power' is 
wanting, on the part of Trinitarians, to renew 
the tragedy of Servetus and others, in the six- 
teenth century? Where is the "liberality,'' the 
justice, or even the decorum of such charges? It 
is difficult to repel them without the use of 
epithets, which the christian would wish tQ ex- 
clude even from his controversial vocabulary. 

If the notions of some of our Unitarian neigh- 
feturs concerning persecution, be^ correct ? thm 



LETTER II. 



they have been themselselves, for sometime, in the 
habit of persecuting the Orthodox; for they have 
not hesitated to hold up them and their opinions 
to publick view iu a most odious light, and to 
ascribe to both a most pestiferous character* 
Again; if these notion? be correct, then, too. 
Dr. Priestly, and Mr. Belsham, and other 
champions of Unitarianism, were in the constant 
habit, for many years, and some of them contin- 
ue in the habit, of "persecuting" the Orthodox 
of Great Britian, in publickly stigmatizing them 
as "polytheists," "idolaters, 1 ' and "blasphe- 
" mers." But did the Orthodox ever call this 
44 persecution?" 1 never heard of such a charge* 
Tkey were too candid and too reasonable ever 
to think of it. Nay more; I have long known 
that the Pagans persecuted the primitive Chris- 
tians. But I never supposed that the primitive 
Christians persecuted the Pagans, under whose 
government they lived: yet they certainly did. 
with the utmost plainness and fidelity, proclaim 
to their Pagan neighbours, that Paganism was a 
most false and corrupt system, poisonous to the 
morals, and destructive to the souls of its adhe- 
rents Was this f 'persecution?" 

6* 



LETTER If. 



And here I am forcibly reminded of what oc- 
curred between the Christians and the Pagans s 
in the early periods of the church. The Pagans 
had been long accustomed, without the least dif- 
ficulty, to tolerate each other. So obscure were 
their views of truth, and so slight their impres- 
sions of its importance, that the prevalent idea 
among them seems to have been, that almost all 
sects were equally right, and equally safe; that 
they all had truth enough in their respective sys- 
tems to answer the great purposes of religion § 
and that, therefore, they ought to live together 
without the least disposition to impeach the 
standing or the prospects of each other. These 
being the current opinions, and the established 
habits of Pagans, it might have been expected 
that, when Christianity appeared, and began to 
attract publick notice, they would have regarded 
and treated it with the same indulgence that 
they were accustomed to exercise towards one 
another. But it proved to be entirely otherwise* 
The Christians were utterly prohibited by their 
religion from acceding to that principle of indis- 
criminate reciprocity with all other sects, which 
Paganism allowed. They steadfastly maintain- 
edj as the bible taught them ? that all who 



LETTER II. 



rejected the religion of Christ, were aliens from 
Grdd: they called upon all men every where to 
repent, to turn from their dumb idols, and carnal 
o d nances, and to believe in the Lord Jesus 
Christ for salvation; and proclaimed, that all 
who failed to comply with this command, incur- 
red the niosi dreadful guilt and danger; and 5 
continuing so, must perish eternally. The 
blinded Pagans construed this honest fidelity, 
on the part of christians, into an evidence of 
enmity to mankind. Their holy zeal in beseech- 
ing men to Jlee from the wrath to come, was 
considered as indicating a mMignant spirit; and 
that which ought to have been recognized as the 
purest benevolence, was reviled as the bitterest 
and most merciless bigotry! The consequences 
were melancholy. Both government and people 
persecuted the christians with unrelenting fury; 
they were hunted like beasts of prey; their 
blood flowed in every direction; and that they 
were not exterminated from the earth, was not 
owing to the charity or the forbearance of those 
whom they sought to save. 

Such has been the spirit of the enemies of the 
truth ip ali ages; and such it is at this hour. 



LETTER IL 



To every form of error they are indulgent. 
When any modification of heresy presems itself, 
however widely it may differ from their own, it 
appears as if the milk of kindness were the yery 
element of their souls. Even the tenets of the 
moral deist, though allowed to be erroneous and 
to be deplored, are yet spoken of in the Ian- 
guage of forbearance and commiseration, rather 
than of heavy censure, or of solemn warning. 
But let Orthodoxy make her appearance; and, 
however mild her language, or respectful her 
address, not only the frown of disapprobation 
is visible; but all the vials of wrath are poured 
out upon her. She is loaded with opprobious 
epithets; and appears to be really regarded as 
the most odious and dangerous of all adversaries. 

I do not say that all who are called Unitarians 
manifest this temper towards Orthodoxy. But 
I do say, without fear of contradiction, that this 
spirit of ancient Paganism is very strikingly ex- 
hibited by the great majority of those Unitarians 
with whose persons or writings I have been ac- 
quainted. They have appeared willing to toler- 
ate every thing excepting the truth. But when 
Christ was to be opposed ? or his truth sacrificed* 



LETTER II. 



Herod and Pilate^ by whatever names they were 
called, have been ever ready to make friends 
together. On this fact I make no further com- 
ment. You will judge for yourselves whether 
it is characteristic!?: of the spirit of truth, or of 
the spirit of error* 

After all, it cannot be denied, that Orthodoxy, 
both in her doctrinal opinions, and her practical 
spirit, has been considered, in all ages, by Unw 
tarians, and indeed by the children of this world 
generally, as austere, bigotted, and even intoler- 
ant. So it was, as every one may see from the 
New Testament, in the days of Paul. So it was 
in the days of Irenceus, Tertullian and Cyprian* 
So it was when the Waldenses exhibited their 
testimony in the cause of holiness, as well as of 
truth. So it is at the present day; and so it 
must be in the very nature of things. In the 
eyes of a dissipated and profligate child, the 
most affectionate parent who wishes to restrain 
and reform him, is an enemy to his happiness; 
his commands are unreasonable, and his controul 
hateful tyranny. In the view of the lawless in- 
vader of the publick peace, the conscientious 
and faithful magistrate^ who loves and enforces 



LETTER II. 



the principles of social order, appears an odi- 
ous despot, a foe to all rational enjoyment. 
For this I know of no remedy, but the conver- 
sion of the deluded When his eyes are opened, 
then, and not before, he will see, that what he 
thought tyranny, wa3 benevolent regulation! 
and what he loathed, as unfriendly to enjoy- 
ment, was most directly fitted to promote hie 
temporal as well as his eternal happiness. 



LETTER HI. 



Subject continued — Fourth prejudice, — against every 
thing Mysterious in religion — Fifth prejudice, — the 
Authority of Great JYames* 

Christian Brethren, 

I have not yet done with the prejudicies which 
set themselves in array against humble and can- 
did inquiry on the subject in which we are en- 
gaged. Two more remain to be considered. — 

IV. The Fourth which I shall mention is 5 
the disposition in multitudes to revolt at the 

SUGGESTION OF ANY THING MYSTERIOUS IN RE- 
LIGION. This prejudice and outcry against 
mystery, are among the weapons which Unita- 
rians most frequently employ against Ortho- 
doxy; and at which many who call themselves 
Orthodox are often perplexed, and at a loss to 
answer. The substance cf the objection com- 
monly made on this subject, may oe thus 
expressed— 



LETTER 1 



"The term Revelation is only applicable t* 
" those things which are made known, conse- 
"quently which are brought down to n level 
u with our reason, that is, which may be com- 
prehended. What is not brought down to a 
"level with our rational powers, cannot be un- 
derstood, a ( id of course, is no revelation to us. 
"Did the Gospel eaily contain doctrines above 
"reason, it would, so far, cease to be a divine 
"revelation. We may also safely conclude, thatj 
"as the Gospel was originally preached to the 
"poor, and intended more especially for them; 
"as it is a revelation to babes in knowledge, it 
"cannot be supposed to contain any mysterious 
"or incomprehensible doctrine. Nay, to be- 
" lieve a doctrine which we cannot comprt-neud 
"is impossible and absurd. We may say we 
"believe it; but we cannot really believe it, be- 
" cause we know not what it is. And if we say 
"we believe what we do not understand, we, in 
"fact, say we believe we know not what; and 
"how, in that case, are we either to explain or 
"give a reason for what we believe. It is im- 
possible. Where Mystery begins, faith and, 
a religion end." 



LETTER HE 



73 



The first remark which I have to offer on this 
reasoning, which, in truth, scarcely deserves to 
be called plausible, is, that if it prove any thing, 
it proves by far too much. It will banish from 
the list of credible things many articles of belief, 
which no man in his senses thinks of doubting, 
much less of rejecting. In fact, upon the princi- 
ple of the reasoning just detailed, a man can 
believe nothing, or next to nothing; for, assu- 
redly, there is nothing either in nature or in 
grace, either in creation or in providence, 
which he can fully explain. Mystery surrounds 
us; it besets our patn, wherever we go; and 
on every subject that comes before our minds, 
physical or moral, after we proceed a very fevr 
steps, we are met by impenetrate mystery* 
The facts are indubitable, but the manner ia 
which they exist as facts, the process by which 
they are brought about, and the Reasons of that 
process, are alike wholly unknown. The truth 
is, it is only allowed to man in the present state 
to perceive effects; to observe facts; to ar« 
range them in the best order, and to make the 
best deductions from them, that he can; that he 
may foresee how far similar effects may be ex* 
pected in given circumstances, ai.d thus be atte 

7 



74 



LETTER III. 



to apply them to purposes of practical utility, 
He can do no more. He may talk in proud and 
pompous language of unfolding and explaining 
the secrets of nature, and may sometimes ima- 
gine that lie has really done so: but it is an 
entire mistake. Still all that he knows is a few 
facts. Of the essence of things, or of the nature 
of causation, in any case, he knows nothing — ■ 
literally nothing. 

To reveal, then, does not signify in all cases, 
©r, indeed, in almost any case, to explain. Any 
thing may be revealed, and remain a profound 
mystery still. When the discoverer of the Mag- 
net brought to light a series of facts concerning 
that wonderful influence, he may be said to have 
revealed to men a knowledge of them. But did 
he explain them? Have they ever been explain- 
ed to the present hour? Why does the magnetick 
needle point to the poles? Why does it, in any 
case, deviate from the true meridian? Why do 
some of its known and registered laws differ so 
entirely from those of all other substances with 
which we are acquainted? To these inquiries 
the most acute philosophers have nothing to re- 
ply. The principles upon whieb the phenomena 



LETTER III. 



in question rest, are still hidden from our 
view, by a veil which no man has been able to 
penetrate. Yet no man thinks of doubting the 
facts alluded to, or of questioning the great util- 
ity of the knowledge of them to mankind. And, 
for any thing we know, both the persons and the 
property of men, may be transported across 
oceans just as safely, and as expeditiously, with 
our present scanty knowledge, as if we were able 
to go to the bottom of the subject. In like manner, 
the wind bloweth where it listeth, and we hear 
the sound thereof; but whence it cometh, or 
whither it goeth; what is the source of its end- 
less variations, and what the rules, if there be 
any, by which we might calculate them, no 
student of this branch of natural history, that I 
have ever heard of, (though some of the shrewd- 
est and closest observers that ever lived have 
been busy on the subject for near sixty centu- 
ries) has hitherto imagined he was able to telL 
But, while all this is covered with mystery, the 
mariner spreads his canvass to the gale without 
hesitation, and receives all the benefit of its im- 
pulse, in traversing the deep, perhaps just as 
well, as if he knew all that is knowable on the 
subject. The same train of remark might be 



LETTER nr. 



applied to Electricity and Chemistry, each of 
which is really a little world of mysteries; and 
f)f both which, all that we can say is, that an as- 
semblage of facts is revealed, or made known; 
but that we are not able to explain one of them, 
or approach to an explanation, 

Again; does any one doubt the propriety of 
saying that many of the attributes of God are 
revealed #o us in his word? Yet no one means 
by this that revelation enables us to comprehend 
them; but only that it asserts the fact that such 
perfections exist in Jehovah, and makes a prac- 
tical application of them. For example, that 
God is omnipresent, revelation distinctly and 
frequently affirms. But does it explain this 
attribute of the Supreme Being? Does any 
man think of comprehending it? Should we not 
consider that man as insane, who should talk of 
being able to comprehend it? What do we mean, 
then, when we say that this doctrine^ is revealed? 
We certainly mean nothing more than that we 
are assured the fact exists, as before suggested. 
In like manner, the Unitarians, as well as the 
Orthodox, are accustomed to say, that the scrip- 
tures reveal a future world of bliss and glory* 



LETTER HI. 



Hi 



prepared for the righteous, after death; and 
also inform us that ihe happiness of that world 
will exceed our highest conceptions. But dv) we 
comprehend that exceeding and eternal weight 
of glory? How does the disembodied spirit, 
after death, travel to that world? How does it 
perceive and enjoy the unutterable glories of 
heaven, without bodily organs, which are the 
inlets to our principle pleasures, and the instru- 
ments by which the soul acts, in the present 
life? How will all the activity, and the inter- 
course, and the services of that exalted state be 
carried on? Above all, what is comprehended in 
seeing God face to face, and knowing as we are 
known? I profess not to be able to explain one 
of these glorious realities; while yet we all ad- 
mit that the genera! facts are undoubtedly 
"revealed." These things are not, indeed 5 
incomprehensible in their own nature; but only 
by us, as long as we are in the body. Glorified 
saints comprehend them entirely; and so will 
saints now on earth, by and by, when their 
faculties are enlarged. But even glorified saints 
are, probably, not able to comprehend many 
things which are easily comprehended by Ga- 

hrieL But as God is a Being who has no parallel 

7# 



78 



LETTER III. 



in the Universe; and as our knowledge of all 
beings must be derived through the medium of 
analogy, that is, by means of some other being, 
with which we are more familiar; so it is cer- 
tian that, to eternity, the most exalted creature 
will see many glories in Jehovah which lie will 
be forever unable to comprehend. 

Now, to apply all this to the case in hand. We 
say, that the one only living and true God exists 
in a Trinity of Persons — the Father, the Son, 
and the Holy Ghost; that the Father is of none 5 
neither begotten nor proceeding; that the Son 
is, in a mysterious manner, eternally begotten 
of the Father, and is a Divine Person, equal 
with the Father; that the Holy Ghost is also a 
Divine Person, proceeding from the Father and 
the Son, from all eternity; and that these Three 
are One, the same in substance, equal in power 
and glory. We think that the scriptures reveal 
this mode of the Divine existence, that is, de- 
clare the fact, without explaining it; and, on the 
authority of scripture alone, we believe the 
fact, simply as revealed, while we confess our- 
selves utterly unable to comprehend it. We do 
riot suppose that any man on earth ever did, 



LETTER ifL 



7? 



or ever can, understand this august mystery* 
Whether glorified spirits, or angels around 
the throne of God, comprehend it, we pretend 
not to conjecture; although we have no doubt 
that many things relating to the Divine mode of 
existence will be, to the most exalted principal!' 
ties and powers in heaven, entirely and forever 
incomprehensible; and for any thing we can tell 
to the contrary, that under consideration may be 
among the number* 

But, however mysterious this fact, as to the 
mode of the Divine existence, may be, it is not 
more incomprehensible-than the Divine Omni- 
presence, and other attributes of the Godhead 3 
which are revealed in scripture, and which Uni- 
tarians no more than others ever think of calling 
in question. It is said to be utterly incredible 
that any being should be One and Three at the 
same time. There is said to be an absurdity— 
a self-evident, mathematical absurdity, in the 
very proposition; and no one, our opponents 
alledge, can be required to believe that which is, 
in the very nature of things, and in terms, a 
manifest absurdity. They confess that we may 
believe, that which is above reason ? bu£ not that 



80 



LETTER III. 



which is plainly and undoubtedly contrary k> 
reason. But does not all this presumptuous lan- 
guage arise from our venturing to do what the 
scriptures expressly and strongly condemn, 
viz. considering God as a being altogether such 
an one as ourselves? When the Most High 
speaks of himself to mortals, it must be in the 
lauguage of mortals. But shall we not certainly 
and greatly err if we interpret that language as 
meaning, when applied to Jehovah, the same 
thing that it means when applied to ourselves? 
Yet is not this error the foundation of the whole 
objection! When it is objected that the doctrine 
of the Trinity is contrary to reason, what is 
meant? Does the objector mean, that the doc- 
trine is contrary to the nature of things; con- 
trary to reason, as it exists in the infinite and 
eternal Mind? If this be his meaning, the asser- 
tion is utterly denied. He does not understand 
what the nature of things is; and, of course, is 
not qualified, unless to a very small extent, to 
pronounce what is, or is not, contrary to it. 
Until he is able to comprehend the nature of 
all things, and among others, of God him- 
sele, he surely ought to be cautious in pro- 
Bouncing what is irreconcileable with reason* 



LETTER III. 



11 



But if he mean, that the doctrine in question is 
contrary to his reason contrary to his narrow, 
unphilosophical prejudices, which render him 
unwilling to allow any thing in God which he 
does not perceive in himself, or in creatures, — 
then, it may indeed be so, that the doctrine in 
question cannot be reconciled with such reason; 
but this, I humbly conceive, will be no solid 
objection to it with any reasonable man. 

On account of the poverty of language, we 
are obliged to express our ideas of the Divine 
simplicity by the term Unity. Perhaps it is 
the best word for the purpose that language 
affoids. But before any one undertakes to de" 
cide that a Trinity of Persons in God is incon- 
sistent with the Divine Unity, he ought to be 
able to cell us what Unity is. But is any man 
able to do this? Post people are, probably, 
ready to suppose, at first view, that this is an 
easy task; that the idea expressed by this word 
is so plain, simple, and perfectly intelligible, 
that there is no difficulty in defining it aright. 
But I suspect that the more an enlightened 
and acute mind contemplates the subject, the 
more he will be inclined to believe, that, like the 



$2 



LETTER ». 



subject of personal identity, and some others of 
similar character, there is a difficulty in compre- 
hending and stating it, which is almost, if not 
altogether, insuperable. An individual man if 
one;— yet he is made up of soul and body, and 
some say of a third part, called spirit; each 
having its distinct and appropriate nature. But 
does this two-fold, or three-fold nature interfere 
with his unity? I presume no one will suppose 
it does. But why not, on the principle of the 
objection which I am repelling! A machine ii 
one, though made up of a number of parts. In 
what sense is Unity applied here? A Legisla- 
tive body is one, though composed of many 
members. What is meant by unity in this case! 
We are accustomed to say, and I believe that, 
in mechanical philosophy, it is a true saying, 
that more than one substance cannot occupy the 
same space at the same time? But are we sure 
that this axiom has any application to spirit — 
and, above all, that it applies to that Infinite 
Spirit, who is every where equally present? In 
short, if we cannot tell what Unity means; if 
we find ourselves utterly perplexed when we 
undertake to define what Oneness, in the ab- 
stract, implies, and especially what it means 



LETTER III. 



85 



vrhen ascribed to the Great Eternal, who is 
exalted above all blessing, and all praise; we 
surely cannot be prepared to decide how far a 
Trinity of Persons in the Divine Essence is in- 
consistent with it, and involves any thing like an 
absurdity or contradiction. 

But further; suppose we were able to com- 
prehend a id define perfectly what Unity means, 
and to remove every difficulty on that score; 
has any Trinitarian ever said that the Deity is 
one in the same sense in which He is three? If 
any thing of this kind had ever been asserted, it 
might be called a contradiction. But this, it is 
well known, is explicitly disavowed, and the 
contrary asserted, by all sober believers in the 
doctrine of the Trinity; and how far it is consis- 
tent with candour and honesty, in disputants on 
the Unitarian side, to be perpetually recurring 
to an implied charge on this subject, for which 
there is no foundation, I shall not at present 
stop to inquire. Let it be distinctly understood, 
then, that when Trinitarians say there are three 
Persons in the Godhead, they do not by any 
means intend to say, that God is three and one in 
the same sense* The Unity refers to one respect 



§4 



LETTER III. 



the Trinity to another. How this is to be ex- 
plained, they do not pretend to know, or even 
to have an opinion. They consider it as their 
duty, simply and humbly to receive the fact, as 
a great mystery, without presuming to compre- 
hend it, or to attempt a development of the 
manner in which the fact exists; just as they 
receive the fact of the Divine Omnipresence, or 
of the blessedness of heaven; although the same 
Bible which reveals these facts, declares that 
they are both far beyond the reach of our minds. 

But it will, perhaps, be asked, what we mean 
when we say, there are three Persons in the 
Godhead? What kind of distinction is that 
which is expressed by the word Person? We 
frankly answer, we do not know. We find a 
certain three-fold mode of existence in the Deity 
frequently referred to in Scripture, but not ex- 
plained; it may be because it is not possible 
adequately to explain it to creatures in our situ- 
ation; perhaps not even to any created being. 
There is an essential poverty in all human lan- 
guage, when we attempt to speak of the proper- 
ties of spirits, and more especially when we 
speak concerning the most Exalted and In com* 



LETTER III. 



85 



prehensible of all Spirits, The term Person 
has been employed in the Church of Christ, to 
express the distinction before us. for manj 
centuries. We found it in use; and net know- 
ing a better term for the purpose intended, we 
have cheerfully adopted, and continue to -ise it 
still. We by no means understand it, however, 
in a gross or carnal sense. We utterly deny 
that we mean by it three distinct, independent 
beings; for we believe that there is bat one 
God. But we mean to express by it a certain 
(to us mysterious) three-fold mode of existence, 
in the one living and true God, which carries 
with it the idea of an ineffably glorious So- 
ciety in the Godhead, and lays a foundation for 
the use of the personal pronouns, I, Thou, He^ 
in that ever-blessed Society. In short, to employ 
the language of Dr. Barrow, we believe, "That 
'• there is one Divine Nature or Essence, com- 
"mon to three Persons, incomprehensibly uni- 
" ted, and ineffably distinguished; united in 
"essential attributes, distinguished by peculiar 
"relations; all equally infinite in every Divine 
"perfection; each different from the other in 
"order and manner of subsistence; that there 
u is a mutual existence of One in All 5 and All in 



LETTER HI, 



u One; a communication without any deprive 
" tion or diminution in the communicant; an 
M eternal generation, and an eternal procession, 
" without precedence or succesion, without pro- 
sper causality or dependence; a Father impart- 
ing his own, and the Son receiving his Fathers 
"lite, and a Spirit issuing from both, without 
u any division or multiplication of essence* — 
" These are notions which may well puzzle our 
"reason in conceiving how they agree, but 
" should not stagger our faith in assenting that 
"they are true: upon which we should medi- 
" tate, not with hope to comprehend, but with 
i; dispositions to admire; veiling our faces in 
**■ the presence, and prostrating our reason at the 
i; feet, of Wisdom so far transcending us."* 

Nor ought it to give rise to the least difficulty 
in the minds of any, that the second Person of 
the Trinity is called the Son of God; that He is 
said to be the only Begotten £o/z, and the eter- 
nally Begotten. I know that the doctrine of the 
eternal generation of the Son of God is regarded 
by many as implying a contradiction in terms* 
But here again is a most presumptuous assump= 

% Barrow ? s Defence of the Trmiy. p. 1* & 



LETTER III. 



87 



lion of the principle, that God is a being altogeth- 
er such an one as ourselves. Because generation 
among men necessarily implies priority, in the 
order of time as well as of nature, on the part of 
the father, and derivation and posteriority on the 
part of the son, the objection infers that it must 
also be so in the Divine nature. But is this a 
legitimate, is it a rational inference? It certainly 
is not. That which U true, as it respects the 
nature of man, may be infinitely removed from 
the truth, as it respects the eternal God. It has 
been often well observed, that, with regard to all 
effects which are voluntary, the cause must be 
prior to the effect; as the father is to the son, 
in human generation: But that in all that are 
necessary, the effect must be coeval with the 
cause; as the stream is with the fountain, and 
light with the sun. Has the sun ever existed a 
moment without sending out beams? And if the 
sun had been an eternal being, would there not 
have been an eternal, necessa ry emanation of 
light from it! But God is confessedly eternal. 
Where, then, is the absurdity or contradiction 
of an eternal, necessary emanation from Him, or, 
if you please, an eternal generation,— and also an 
eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the 



LETTER HI. 



Father and the Son? To deny the possibility of 
this, or to assert that it is a manifest contradic- 
tion, either in terms or ideas, is to assert that 
although the Father is from all eternity, yet He 
could not act from all eternity; which, I will ven- 
ture to assert, is as unphilosophical as it is 
impious. Sonship, even among men, implies no 
personal inferiority. A son may be perfectly 
equal, and is sometimes greatly superior to his 
father, in every desirable power, and quality: 
and, in general, he does in fact partake of the 
same human nature, in all its fulness and per- 
fection, with his parent. But, still, forsooth, it 
is objected, that we cannot conceive of generation 
in any other sense than as implying posteriority 
and derivation. But is not this saying, in other 
words, that the objector is determined, in the 
Jaee of all argument, to persist in measuring Je- 
hovah by earthly and human principles? Shall we 
never have done with such a perverse begging 
of the question, as illegitimate in reasoning, as 
it is impious in its spirit? The scriptures declare 
[hat Christ is the Son, the only begotten So?i of 
the Father; to the Son the Father is represent- 
ed as saying, Thy throne, O God, is forever and 
ever: and concerning himself the Son declares 



LETTER III. 



89 



I and my Father are one. This is enough for the 
christian's faith. He finds no more difficulty in 
believing this, than in believing that there is an 
eternal, omniscient and omnipresent Spirit, who 
made all worlds out of nothing, and upholds 
them continually by the word of his power. 

I am aware that some who maintain, with 
great zeal, the Divinity and Atonement of 
Christ, reject his eternal So?iship, or generation? 
as being neither consistent with reason, nor 
taught in scripture. It does not accord, either 
with my plan or my inclination, to spend much 
time in animadverting on this aberration, for 
such I must deem it, from the system of gospel 
truth. I will only say that, to me, the doctrine 
of the eternal Sonship of the Saviour appears 
to be plainly taught in the word of God, and to 
be a doctrine of great importance in the economy 
of salvation. Of course, I view those who reject 
it, not merely as in error, but in very serious 
error; an error which, though actually connect- 
ed with ardent piety, and general orthodoxy, 
in many who embrace it, has, nevertheless, a 
very unhappy tendency, and cannot fail, I fear, 
to draw in its train many mischievous ponse 



90 



LETEER III. 



quenees. If the title Father, be the distinctive 
title of the first Person of the adorable Trinity, 
as such, does not the correlative title of Son 
seem to be called for by the second Person, as. 
such? If the second Person of the Trinity is not 
to be distinguished by the title of Son, what is 
his distinguishing title? By what appropriate 
name are we to know Him, as distinguished 
from the other Persons? In the form of Bap- 
tism, all the friends of orthodoxy grant that the 
Father and the Holy Ghost are expressive of 
divine personal distinctions; but if so, what 
good reason can be given why the Son should be 
understood differently? In short, my belief is, 
that the doctrine of the eternal generation of the 
Son, is so closely connected with the doctrine of 
the Trinity, and the Divine character of the 
Saviour, that where the former is generally 
abandonded, neither of the two latter will be long 
retained. I must, therefore, warn you against 
the error of rejecting this doctrine, even though 
it come from the house of a friend* It is a mys- 
tery, but a precious mystery, which seems to be 
essentially interwoven with the whole substance* 
a well as language, of the blessed economy of 
mercy. 



LETTER ill. 



Concerning this eternal generation of the 
Son, the early christian writers constantly de* 
clared that it was firmly to be believed; but, 
at the same time, that it was presumptuous to 
attempt to inquire into the manner of it. 

Irenceus asserts that "the Son, prom eter- 

** NITY, CO-EXISTED WITH THE FATHER ; and 

" that from the beginning, he always revealed 
"the Father to angels, and archangels, and 
" principalities, and powers, and all to whom it 
" pleased him to reveal him."* 

Lactantius, in hisi fourth book De vera Sapien- 
Ha* says, "How, therefore, did the Father beget 
"the Son? These divine works can be known of 
"none, declared by none. But the holy scrip- 
"tures teach that He is the Son of God, that 
"He is the Word of God/ 5 

Ambrose, in his treatise, De Fide, ad Gratian* 
urn, speaks in the following decisive and elo- 
quent strain — I inquire of you "when and how 
"the Son was begotten? It is impossible for me 
"to know the mystery of this generation. My 

* Contra Her eses, Lib, II, cap 30, 



LETTER III. 



" mind fails; my tongue is silent; and not only 
"mine, but the tongues of angels: it is above 
H principalities, above angels, above the Cheru- 
" bim, above the Seraphim, above all understand- 
ing. Lay thine hand upon thy mouth. It is 
" not lawful to search into these heavenly mys- 
4t teries. It is lawful to know that he was born, 
H but not lawful to examine how he was born. 
" The former I dare not deny; the latter I am 
"afraid to inquire into. For if Paul, when he 
" was taken up into the third heaven, affirms 
" that the things which he heard could not be 
" uttered, how can we express the mystery of 
"the Divine Generation, which we can neither 
" understand nor see?" 

Let not, then, my Christian Brethren, the 
charge of "mystery," or the cant proverb, that 
"where mystery begins, faith and religion end," 
in the least move you. That mystery should be 
readily allowed to exist every where in God's 
Creation, and in God's Providence, and at the 
same time be unceremoniously rejected from 
God's Revelation, is indeed more than strange! 
That creatures who acknowledge that the na- 
ture of God is infinitely unlike, and infinitely 



LETTER III. 



•as 



above that of any other being in the Universe; 
and that their owii share of reason is so small 
that they can scarcely think or speak intelligibly 
about it, or so much as dehne their ovvn faculties 
of reasoning; should yet refuse to believe any 
thing of Jehovah which does not accord with 
human notions; is, surely, as weak and irrational 9 
as it is. presumptuous. But that creatures who 
confess themselves to be miserable sinners, lying 
at the footstool of mercy, and standing in need 
of a revelation from God, to teach them, what 
they could not otherwise know, concerning his 
perfections, and the way of acceptance with Him; 
should yet, when they acknowledge that such a 
Revelation has been given, undertake to sit in 
judgment upon it, and to reject such parts of it 
as are above the grasp of their disordered and 
enfeebled reason; argues a degree of daring and 
infatuated impiety, which, if it were not so com- 
mon, we should be ready to say could not exist* 
Wherein does it essentially differ from lhat tern-* 
per by which "angels became apostate spirits?" 

In truth, when men once begin to indulge in 
this disposition to reject from revelation that 
which they cannot comprehend, they not only 



94 



LETTER III. 



cherish a temper hostile to piety; but they ven* 
ture upon a stream which will land them they 
know not where. I referred, in a preceding 
pa^e, to the Omnipresence and Omniscience of 
God, as attributes which all who bear the Chris* 
tian name are ready to acknowledge. But you 
will, perhaps, be surprised to learn that this 
representation was not strictly correct. , The 
fact is, that both these perfections of God, as 
well as his Eiernity, his Immensity, and his 
Spirituality, have been virtually called in ques- 
tion by some Unitarians; on the principle that 
our reason could not comprehend them. On the 
same ground, also, they have denied that the 
creation of all things out of nothing' is credible*. 
Now my remark on this reasoning is, not that 
there is any inconsistency in it; for, conceding 
to them their fundamental principle, that noth- 
ing incomprehensible is to be believed, all the 
Divine perfections which have been alluded to, 
and several others, must be drawn into doubt, 
or totally rejected. 

Accordingly, the progress which this compen- 
dious mode of disposing of the mysteries of 
revelation has made among the Unitarian the- 



LETTER III. 



§5 



dlogians and criticks of Germany, affords a sol- 
emn warr ing. Once they stood substantially on 
the same ground with the body of the Unitarians 
in this country ; and would have been shocked at 
the thought of going to the length in scepticism 
at which they are now found. But, proceeding 
step by stc t>, many of them have come to reject 
from the Bible, all mysteries, ai*d all mira- 
cles. In their view, the Mosaic account of the 
Creation, is a mere poetical fable; the delivery 
of the Law on Mount Sinai, a dexterous man- 
agement of a thunder storm; the whole Jewish 
ritual, a mere contrivance of ingenious super- 
stition; and the effusion of the Holy Spirit on 
the day of Pentecost, nothing more than a gust 
of wind, accompanied by an unusual excitement 
of electric fluid! This is the natural course of 
the Unitarian doctrine respecting mysteries. 
Some serious men among them msty, and no 
doubt do, abhor what they would call such impi- 
ous extremes; but others will probably soon be 
found following the German example; and the 
next generation will perhaps find the majority 
of American Unitarians standing on German 
ground. Such is the deceitfulness of error; and 
so great the danger resulting from the adoption 
ef one corrupt principle! 



LETTER/IIL 



The following quotation from an eminent Di- 
vine, and truly eloquent Preacher, is so much to 
my purpose, and so admirably expresses what I 
wish to communicate on this branch of the sub- 
ject, that I make no apology for closing with it 
what I have to say on the mysteries of revelation* 

" This grandeur of God removes the greatest 
"stumbling blocks that sceptics and infidels pre- 
" tend to meet with in religion, It justifies all 
"those dark mysteries which are above the 
" comprehension of our feeble reason. We 
"would not make use of this reflection to open 
"a way for human fancies, or to authorize e\ery 
"thing that is presented to us under the idea of 
" the marvellous. All doctrines that are incom- 
prehensible, are not divine; nor ought we to 
"embrace any opinion merely because it is be- 
"yond our knowledge. But when a religion in 
"other respects has good guarantees; when we 
"have good arguments to prove that such a rev- 
"elation comes from heaven; when we certainly 
"know that it is God who speaks; ought we to 
" be surprised if ideas of God which come so 
"fully authenticated, absorb and confound us? 
" I freely grant, that, had I consulted my own 



LETTER III. 



"reason only, I could not have discovered some 
4i mysteries of the Gospel. Nevertheless, when 
* 4 1 think on the grandeur of God; when I cast 
;; my eyes on that vast Ocean; when I consider 
* ; that immense All; nothing astonishes me, 
"nothing stumbles me, nothing seems to me in- 
admissible, how incomprehensible soever it 
44 may be. When the subject is Divine, I am 
" ready to believe all, to admit all, to receive 
"all; provided I be convinced that it is God 
"himself who speaks to me, or any one on his 
4 'part. After this, I am no more astonished 
44 that there are three distinct Persons in one 
44 Divine Essence: one God, and yet a Fath- 
44 er, a Son, and a Holy Ghost. After this, I am 
44 no more astonished that God foresees all with- 
4# out forcing any; permits sin without forcing 
"the sinner; ordains free and intelligent crea- 
tares to such and such ends, yet without des- 
troying their intelligence or their liberty. 
;4 After this, I am no more astonished that the 
44 justice of God required a satisfaction propor- 
tional to his greatness; that his own love hath 
44 provided that satisfaction; and that God, from 
44 trie abundance of his compassion, designed the 
* ; mystery of an incarnate God: a mystery whiefe 



BB, LETTER III. 

"angels admire, while sceptics oppose: a mys* 
"tery which absorbs human reason, but which 
"fills all heaven with songs of praise: a mys- 
" tery which is the great mystery, by excellence, 
"but the greatness of which nothing should 
"make us reject, since religion proposeth it as 
" the grand effort of the wisdom of the incompre- 
hensible God, and commandeth us to receive 
"it on the testimony of the incomprehensible 
"God himself. Either religion must tell us 
"nothing about God, or what it tells us must be 
"beyond our capacities; and in discovering 
"even the borders of this immense Ocean, it 
"must needs exhibit a vast extent, in which our 
"feeble eyes are lost. But what surprises me, 
"what stumbles me, what frightens me, is to see 
"a diminutive creature, a contemptible man, a 
"little ray of light glimmering through a few 
" feeble organs, controvert a point with the Su- 
preme Being, oppose that Intelligence who 
''sitteth at the helm of the world; question 
"what he affirms, dispute what he determines, 
"appeal from his decisions, and, even after 
"God hath given evidence, reject all doctrines 
* 4 that are beyond his capacity. Enter into thy 
" nothingness, mortal creature! What madness 



- LETTER III. 



99 



" animates thee? How durst thou pretend; thou 
"who art but a point; thou whose essence is 
"but an atom, to measure thyself with the Su- 
"preme Being, with Him who fills heaven and 
"earth; with Him whom heaven, and the heaven 
"of heavens cannot contain? Canst thou by 
"searching find out God? Canst thou find out 
"the Almighty to perfection? High as heaven % 
"what canst thou do? deeper than hell, what 
"canst thou know? He stretcheth out the north 
"over the empty place, and hangeth the earth 
" upon nothing* He bindeth up the waters in his 
"thick clouds, the pillars of heaven tremble, and 
"are astonished at his reproof Lo these are 
"parts of his ways, but how little a portion is 
"heard of Him? But the thunder of his power , 
"who can understand? Gird up now thy loins 
"like a man; for I will demand of thee, and 
"answer thou me* Where wast thou zvhen I 
"laid the foundation of the earth? Declare if 
"thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the 
u measures thereof? Who hath stretched out the 
" line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations 
"thereof fastened? Who laid the corner stone 
" thereof, when the morning stars sang together, 
"and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Who 



LETTER Iff. 



"shut up the sea with doors, when I made tht 
" cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a 
"swaddling band for it? When I break up for 
£ it my decreed place, and set bars, and doors, 
" and said, Hitherto shalt thou come, and no 
"farther; and here shall thy proud waves be 
"-stayed? He thai reprove th God, let him an- 
w swer this, O Lord, such knowledge is too 
"wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain 
n unto it."* 

V. The fifth and last Prejudice on this 
subject to which I wish to call your attention, is 
that which arises from the authority of 
great Names. Unitarians are more apt, if I 
do not mistake, than any other sect who assume 
the Christian name, to boast of the patronage of 
distinguished men. This is, possibly, owing, in 
part at least, to that lurking consciousness that 
their cause stands in need of such a prop, which 
more frequently, perhaps, than is imagined, 
attends the advocates of error. And hence 
there is scarcely any method of defending their 
anti-christian citadel of which they appear more 
fond, than to array a list of eminent men, to 

* Sauries Sermons, by Robin&on^ Vol. U p. 78. _ 



LETTER III. 



101 



whom they lay claim, as the open or the secret 
friends of Unitarianism. That cause, they tell 
us, cannot be bad, which some of the greacest 
and best men that ever lived, have espoused. 

The weakness of this plea is so obvious, that 
a formal refutation of it will not be thought ne- 
cessary by any impartial reader. The same plea 
might be urged with quite as much force in sup- 
port of Transubstantiation, the worship of Ima- 
ges and Relicks, and many other of the most 
palpable and irrational errors, that ever disgra- 
ced the Christian Church. They have all had 
able and eminent advocates, whose opinions 
have been confidently quoted in their favour, 
and whose authority would be decisive, if tal- 
ents, learning and virtue, could be admitted as 
substitutes for scriptural warrant. Yet, if any 
one were to urge that, because John Duns 
Scotus, and Aquinas, and Bellarmin, and Fenolen^ 
and Pascal, and a host of other eminent men, 
were all Catholicks, and devoted their great 
powers and erudition to the support of many of 
the superstitions of the Papacy, that therefore 
these superstitions must be founded in Scrip- 
ture; every impartial man would perceive such 

6* 



102 



LETTER III. 



a conclusion to be at once illegitimate in reason- 
ing, and false in fact. Not a whit better is the 
argument drawn by Unitarians., in favour of their 
cause, from the authority of great names. As 
long as they themselves are compelled to ac^ 
knowledge that the grossest absurdities, and the 
most wretched superstitions, have been counte- 
nanced by many men equally distinguished, they 
will hardly venture to lay much stress on an ar- 
gument so capable of being turned against them* 

The truth is, if all the World were against 
the Bible, it would be of no weight in the Chris- 
tian's estimate. If all the talents and learning 
that ever apostate man could vaunt, were lea- 
gued for the support of Unitarianism, it would 
only be another proof that the zvisdom of this 
world is foolishness with God, Thus we argue 
in the case of those who reject Revelation alto- 
gether; and the argument is just as good with 
respect to their near relatives, the Unitari- 
ans. The question which we are called upon to 
solve, is, not whether this great man believed 
in accordance with us; or whether that great 
man believed differently; but the question is, 
what saith the Scriptures? If they be in ou*r 



JLETTER IM. 



103 



fevour, we can well afford to have thousands of 
great names in the ranks of our opponents. 

But it ought to be known, that, whatever may 
be the value of this argument, it operates with 
incomparably more force in favour of Orthodoxy, 
than in favour of Unitarianism. In taking a sur- 
vey of the Christian world, from the time of the 
Apostles to this hour, for one truly great man 
who has avowed himself a Unitarian, I will ven- 
ture to produce five hundred, who have taken 
the opposite side. All the great Reformers ? 
throughout Europe, as we shall see hereafter, 
espoused the cause of Orthodoxy with perfect 
decision. Nay, the great body of the mo9t pro- 
foundly learned and pious men that ever adorn- 
ed both Catholick and protestant Christendom, 
have espoused the same cause, so far as respects 
the main points in dispute between the Orthodox 
and Unitarians. If the question, then, is to be 
carried by a majority of votes — by a majority of 
the great and the erudite, the majority is im- 
mense in favour of Orthodoxy. But if the weight 
of piety, as well as of talent; — of deep Biblical 
and theological knowledge, as well as of elegant 
literature and human science^ is to be takea 



104 



LETTER III. 



Into the account, the preponderance in favour 
of Orthodoxy, is beyond all comparison. This 
Unitarians well know; and, therefore, it must 
be confessed they had no small temptation to 
make, as they have done, an ostentatious display 
of the comparatively few respectable names that 
could be mustered on their side. 

This being so, you will readily perceive what 
estimate you ought to form of those sanguine, 
impetuous, and superficial advocates of Unitari- 
anism, who represent the friends of their system 
as the only really great and learned men; as the 
only men of large views, and profound know- 
ledge; while the friends of Orthodoxy are spoken 
of by them as persons of contracted minds, of 
scanty acquirements, of low, grovelling prejudi- 
ces, and as the weak slaves of system and 
authority. Such miserable rodomontade may 
pass very well with those who know nothing of 
the history of the human mind, and its greatest 
ornaments. But by all others it will be regarded 
as the vainest boasting that can well be imagin- 
ed, and of which a truly learned Unitarian 
-would be utterly ashamed. 



LETTER Iff. 



105 



But it will, perhaps, be asked, Have not 
some men of distinguished talents and learning, 
who avowed themselves Unitarian?, written with 
great ability on the evidences of Christianity, 
and in the defence of some of its doctrines^ 
They have. Bat if Unitarians are not to be 
acknowledged as Christians, what estimate ought 
we to form of these men and their labours? 
Were they powerful writers on behalf of Chris* 
tianity, and yet no Christians? By what name, 
then, ought they to be known? There is really 
no difficulty in this case. A man may write 
with great zeal and force in support of a par- 
ticular part of a religious system, who can 
by no means be considered as a cordial friend 
of the general system. A Dei&i may write 
with great ability in defence of the doctrine of 
a particular Providence, which is evidently a 
doctrine of the Bible; and a Jew may write 
with no less ability in support of the miracles 
and inspiration of the Old Testament Scrip- 
tures, in which the Christian will always own 
him as an auxiliary. But you would not think 
of calling either, on this account, a Christian* 
In like manneF, if Dr. Priestly, or Dr. Lard- 
ner y or any other distinguished Unitarian, wrote 



106 



LETTER IH. 



well on any subject connected with Christianity, 
while we vener-re them Tor their learning and 
virtue?, and thankfully avail ourselves of their 
aid. on any subject on which they have written 
ably a d instructively 5 we are no more bound 
to call them Christians, or to consider the gene- 
ral spirit of their writings as coinciding with 
the Gospel, than we are to consider Josephus-, 
Mmnonides, or Btn Jarchi, as entitled to the 
name of Christian, while we esteem, and employ 
their works, in aid of the Christian cause. 

But, after n,ll, Unitarians are in the constant 
habit of pressing into the list of their friends 
and advocates, many whose names ought never 
to be placed in such company. If any distin- 
guished man be found to have speculated on the 
doctrine of the Trinity, or that of the Deitv of 
the Redeemer, in an unusual manner; if he be 
found to doubt whether the common mode of 
speaking on these doctrines is the best, or 
whether the Athanasian creed is expressed with 
sufficient caution; he is immediately set down 
as a Unitarian. If one of this character hap- 
pen to say a word against Creeds and Confes- 
sions; or to employ mild ? indulgent language 



LETTER III. 



toward those who deny the Saviour's Divinity; 
he is unceremoniously affirmed to be a Unitari- 
an. Nay, if, in the honesty of his heart, the 
most thorough Trinitarian should drop an ex- 
pression, which can be so construed, by a tortur- 
ing logick, as to admit of a -consequence never 
thought of by him who uttered it; he is forth- 
with pronounced a Unitarian. On grounds of 
this sort, you may rel) upon it, my brethren, 
many a pious friend of Orthodoxy has been rep- 
resented as star ding in the Unitarian ranks. 
You are by no means, therefore, to conclude, 
that every one to whom thev give this name, 
really deserves it. The gross calumny with 
which they have persevering!) followed the ex- 
cellent Doctor Watts, is a specimen of this 
injustice as striking as it is shameful. 

With respect to many others whom Unitarians 
claim, my only wonder is that conscientious men 
can possibly boast of such persons as an honour 
to any cau-e. When they bring forward, for 
example, a iong list of clergymen and others, 
of trie church of England, who solemnly pro- 
fessed their belief in the 39 Articles, a: d who 
constantly made use of a liturgy, the whole char- 



168 



LETTER III. 



aeter of which is strikingly Trinitarian; but 
who are still alledged to have been Unitariani 
in principle ; I am amazed at their inconsider- 
ate zeal. Either these persons were really 
Unitarians, or they were not. If they were 
not) then they have been basely calumniated. 
If they zoere, then they have lived in habits of 
the most shameful dishonesty, and perjury: a 
dishonesty and peijury which, if known, could 
not fail of rendering them, in the e)es of all up- 
right men, a disgrace to any society calling 
itself a church of Christ. 

I shall not now agitate the question wheth&f 
Newton and Lock? were Unitarians, as has been 
confidently alledged. But if they were, their 
morality was worthy of their creed. Bnth of 
them repeatedly subscribed the Articles of the 
Church of England; and both of them habit- 
ally joined in the communion, as well as in the 
prayers of that church. Did they do this, then, 
believing those Articles to be essentially er- 
roneous, even with regard to fundamental doc- 
trines; and that worship to be gross idolatry? 
If so, claim them who will! They would have 
been a disgrace to an Orthodox Church, and 



LETTER IM, 



would certainly have been cast out of it, unless 
it had been unfaithful, or they had concealed 
their principles. Whiston, it seems, does alledge 
that 'Newton was almost incurably displeased 
with him for having said that he (Newton) was 
an Avian. This looks as if, either, the charge 
was false, or he was ashamed of his creed, 
and wished to maintain the character of an Or- 
thodox man. Either supposition, I should think, 
would be far from doing credit to the Trinitarian 
cause. As to Mr. Locke, if there were truth 
and candour in the man, he was no Socinian; 
for he solemnly denied it while he lived; he 
acknowledged the doctrine of Christ's satis- 
faction for sin; and, after his death, a dis- 
tinguished literary friend, who lived with him 
during several of the last years of his life, and 
who translated the most valuable of his works 
into the French language, declares, thai, in his 
last moments, he thank d God * fc for the love 
64 shewn to man in justifying him by faith in 
w Jesus Christ, and in particular for having 
* 6 called him to the knowledge of that Divine 
u Saviour."* 



* Locke's Works— 9th Vol. 1?3; 8?o, EdM* 
10 



no 



LETTER lit 



You see, then, my Christian Friencte^the 
amount of this prejudice founded on the au* 
thority of great names. It turns out to be a 
$lea of no force whatever: or rather, so far as it 
has any force, it is in the proportion of five 

HUNDRED TO ONE IN FAVOUR OP ORTHODOXY* 

and against Unitarianism. Will you cast in 
your lot, then, with that comparatively small 
body, who have abandoned the religion of the 
Apostles, and of the primitive Church; some 
of whom have been distinguished for their 
talents and learning, and a few of them eminent 
for their moral virtues; but the generality of 
whom, even Dr. Priestly being judge, have 
never been remarkable for their piety? or will 
you unite your destiny with that great body of 
holy men of God, of whom the world was not 
worthy; men as distinguished for the ardour of 
their piety, and the activity of their benevolent 
zeal, as for the vigour of their minds, and the 
extent of their erudition? If I must follow hu- 
man authority, let the latter be my guides! 



LETTER IVi 



Testimony of the early Fathers on this Subject* 

Christian Brethren 

The word of God, as the Orthodox believe, is 
the only certain test of divine truth; the only 
infallible rule of faith and practice. Of course, 
that which is not found in Scripture, however 
extensively and unanimously it may have been 
received by those who bore the Christian name ? 
must be rejected, as forming no part of that pre- 
cious system which God has revealed to man for 
his salvation. But when we think we find a doc- 
trine plainly, frequently, and solemnly taught 
in the Bible, it certainly does, and, in the esti- 
mation of all reasonable men, it ought to, corrob- 
orate the fact, that the doctrine is really found 
there, and is, consequently, of God, when we 
find the true Church, in all ages, maintaining 



Ilf 



LETTER IT. 



and cleaving to it, nay contending for it, witk 
zeal, as a fundamental part of divine truth. 
I need not tell the pious that there is a conso- 
lation as well as a duty, in walking in the foot- 
steps of the flock* 

Now, if I am not greatly deceived, nothing is 
more easy than to show, that the doctrines of a 
Trinity of Persons in the adorable Godhead, 
and the Divinity of Jesus Christ, have always 
been held as doctrines of the Gospel by the true 
church of Christ, and been regarded and conten- 
ded for as fundamental; that, in the purest ages 
and portions of the church, they have been 
maintained with most care, arid preached with 
most zeal; and that ihnse who rejected- them 
have been always branded as heretics, and, as 
such, cast out of the church, and even denied 
the name of Christian, If all this can be made 
out, as I have no doubt it can, to the satisfaction 
of every impartial mind, will it not go far to- 
wards demonstrating, that the views of the Or- 
thodox on this subject are correct, and that the 
doctrines which they cherish, are indeed the 
truth of God? 



LETTER IV. 



In attempting to give a sketch of thai portion 
of the testimony in favour of our doctrines 
which may be called historical, I might begin 
with the primitive Church, and examine the 
evidence found on this subject in the Sacred 
records. But this would be to enter into so 
large a field, that I must at present decline it, 
as leading me beyond the limits which I have 
prescribed for these Letters. This is a branch 
of the testimony which, if entered upon at all t 
must be pursued into considerable detail. But 
this has been done by so many hands, and with 
so much ability, that I refer you to their labours; 
and shall feel myself warranted in taking for 
granted that the doctrines for which I contend 
are plainly and undoubtedly taught in Scripture. 
When I find the Scriptures declaring, in the 
most express and unequivocal manner, that God 
was manifest in the Jiesh; that Jesus Christ is 
the Lord from heaven; that He is Alpha and 
Omega, the first and the last, which was, and 
which is, and which is to come, the Almighty ; 
that the Jews crucified the Lord of glory ; that 
in the beginning was the Word., and the Word 
was with God, and the Word was God; that all 
things were made by him, and for him, and that 
10* 



114 



LETTER IV. 



without hiw was not any thing made that was 
made; that a- He made alt things, so He upholds 
all things by the word of his power, and is over 
all God blessed forever'. — When I find Him 
called the brightness of the Father's glory, and 
the express Image of his Person — Jehovah our 
righteousness — Jmmanuel, which is, being inter- 
preted, God with us — the mighty God, the ever- 
lasting Father, the Prince of Peace: — When I 
find Him averting concerning himself, that 
which plainly implies Divinity — such as that 
wherever his people are assembled, in all parts 
of the world, there He is in the -midst of them — ■ 
that He has power to forgive sins — and that He 
searcheth the hearts, arid trieth the reins of the 
children of -men: — When I hear him say — / and 
my Father are one — Before Abraham was, I 
am: — When I find it solemnly enjoined that we 
honour the Son even as we honour the Father; 
accompanied with the declaration, that he that 
honoureth not that Son, honoureth not the Father: 
—When I find it said, with peculiar emphasis, 
that He has all power in heaven and on earth — » 
that his throne is forever and ever — that He had 
glory with the Father before the world was — that 
-me must all stand before the judgment seat of 



LETTER IV, 



115 



Christ — that He bore our sins in his own body on 
the tree — that his blood cleanseth from all sin — 
that He is the propitiation for our sins, and not 
for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world 
— that He has made made peace by the blood of his 
cross, — and that He saves his people from their 
sins: — When I read the form of Baptism, which 
the Saviour himself prescribed, and find the 
Son and the Holy Ghost put on a par with the 
Father, both as to personality, and Divine char- 
acter: — When I read the Apostolical Benedic- 
tion, and find the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ 
placed before the love of God the Father, as if 
on purpose to show that the former was not in- 
ferior, either in nature or dignity, to the latter: 
—When 1 find good men represented in the sa- 
cred history as praying to Christ, and commen- 
ding their departing spirits to him: — When I 
find divine perfections, divine works, and divine 
worship every where ascribed to Him: — When I 
read these passages, and many others of a similar 
character, I am compelled to believe that the 
true and proper Divinity of the Son, as equal 
with the Father, is taught in Scripture. To 
suppose language and representations of this 
kind to be applied to a mere man, or to any 



116 



LETTER IT. 



creature, however exalted, is, in my view, of all 
incredible things, one of the most incredible. In 
short, to suppose that men who spake as they 
zvere moved by the Holy Ghost — men who con- 
stantly had it as one of their grand objects, to 
guard their fellow men against idolatry, should 
speak thus concerning any mere created being, 
would be to suppose them speaking with an utter 
disregard of all that is correct in language, of 
all that is sober in thought, and of all that is 
reverential to the majesty of heaven. The 
Bible, if this be supposed, instead of speaking 
the words of truth and soberness, must exhibit 
(with the deepest reverence I would write it) 
the most wonderful compound of empty bombast, 
and of cabbalistical jargon, that ever was utter- 
ed. It cannot be. The eternal Son, therefore, 
is Jehovah, of the same substance or essence 
with the Father, equal in power and glory. 

It is no valid objection to this conclusion, that 
Christ is spoken of, in other parts of Scripture, 
as a man, and that He is represented as speak- 
ing the language, and acting the part of a man. 
This is precisely what we say, that He is God 
and man, having two natures united in one 



LETTER IV. 



11$ 



Person forever. This we bold to have been 
absolutely necessary in order to his being quali- 
fied to be a Mediator between God and man, 
and, as such, to lay his hands upon both. Had 
He not been man, He could not have been made 
subject, as nur Surety, to the law which we had 
broken; nor have obeyed and suffered as our 
representative; and had He not been God, his 
obedience and sufferings could not have had 
that infinite value which was indispensable to 
their efficacy for justifying and saving the un- 
numbered millions of his people. And I will 
add, had not his Person been constituted in this 
wonderful manner, why should the inspired wri- 
ters appear to labour as they do, for adequate 
expressions to set forth the transcendent mys- 
tery and glory of his appearance in the flesh? 

This, I -aid, is not only the doctrine of the 
Bible, but it has also been the doctrine of the 
true Ghqrch of Christ, from the Apostles to the 
present day. To an attempt to establish this 
position; I would now, my Christian Brethren, 
request jotircatidid attention. 

The e^rrh- Christian writers are usually called* 
hy way of distinction, the Fathers. They were 



LETTER IV. 



men, of course, of different degrees of talent anfi 
attainment; placed in different situations; of 
different ways of thinking and feeling, on a 
great variety of subjects; and, consequently, in 
very different degrees entitled to the confidence 
of those who come after them. But I think it 
may be said, without fear of contradiction, that 
they all concur in bearing testimony to the 
truth of the position which I am now engaged in 
supporting. The following extracts from a few 
of them (for to give the whole, would be to write 
several volumes, instead of a small manuel,) 
will be sufficient for my purpose,* 

Barnabas, sometimes called the Apostle, who 
was probably born before the crucifixion of the 
Saviour, and who wrote soon after the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem, by Titus, is a very decisive 

* With respect to a large part of the following ex- 
tracts from the early Fathers, the Author has drawn 
them himself from the original writers, and will be 
responsible for the accuracy of the citations. With 
regard to the rest, not having the originals within 
convenient reach, he has taken them from Bishop Bull, 
Mr. Burgh, Dr. Jamieson, Mr. Simpson, and others, of 
established reputation. It has been his study, in every 
instance, in making, or adopting, a translation, to give 
the strict, unvarnished sense of the writer. 



LETTER IV. 



wUness in favour of the Divinity of Christ. In 
the oth section of his Catholkk epistle, he says, 
16 The Lord was content to suffer for our souls, 
"although He be the lord of the whole 
"laivih; to whom G >d said, before the begin- 
ning of the world, Let us make man after our 
"own ima^e and likeness. " Again, in the 7th 
sec^on, he says, "If therefore the Son of God ? 
u who is Lord of all, and shall come to judge 
"both the quick and the dead, hath suffer* 
"ed, that by his stripes we might live, let us 
"believe that the Sod of God could not have 
"suffered but for us." Surely He who is lord 
of the whole earth— Lord of all — and 
who will judge the quick and dead, can be 
no other than a Divine Person. 

Clemens Romanus was probably born before 
the middle, and wrote towards the close, of the 
first century. As is generally supposed, he 
was personally acquainted with most of the 
Apostles, and seems to have been the same 
person whom saint Paul speaks of as his fellow 
labourer. All the writings of this Father which 
have reached us, are comprised in a few pages* 
In these$ though he no where treats^, formally of* 



LETTER m 



professedly on the subject in hand, he inciden- 
tally expresses him-eif in the following manner: 
— "For Christ is theirs who ate humble, and 
" who do not exalt themselves over his flock. 
"The sceptre of the majesty of God, our 
"Lord Jesus Christ, came not in the shew of 
"pride and arrogance; though He could have 
"done so; but with humility, as the Holy 
"Ghost had before spoken concerning him* 
" And again — -God is good to all, especially 
"to those who flee to his mercy through our 
"Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and 
''majesty forever and ever. AmenP 5 

Polycarp, who flourished in the beginning cf 
the second century, and who suffered martyr- 
dom, under the emperor Marcus Antoninus, about 
A. D. 167, in a short Epistle to the Phillip- 
pians, the only writing of his which is now ex- 
tant, writes thus: "Mercy and peace unto yoiij 
""from- God Almighty, and the Lord Je^us 
"Christ, our Saviour, be multiplied. — Every 
"living creature shall worship Christ* — Now 
w the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christy 
"and he himself, who is our everlasting High 
"Priest, the Son of God, Jesus Christ, buili 



LETTER IV- 



ill 



"you up in faith and truth, and in all meekness 
"and gentleness, and grant unto you a lot and 
"portion among his saints! — God is good to 
" alK especially to those who flee to his mercy, 
"through our Lord Jesus Christ; to whom be 
u glory and majesty forever and ever. Amen!'' 
After the death of Polycarp, the church of 
Smyrna, of which he had been pastor, wrote a 
circular letter to other churches, in which they 
gave an account of his sufferings. From this let* 
ter we learn, that, when he was at the stake, he 
addressed a prayer to God, which he concluded 
with this doxology — "For all things I praise 
" tiiee, I bless thee, I glorify thee, together with 
"the eternal and heavenly Jesus Christ, with 
" whom unto thee, and the Holy Spirit, be glory 
"both now and forever, world without end* 
"Amen!" — The same epistle informs us that, 
after his death, the Jews suggested to the hea- 
then judge, that he should not suffer the Chris- 
tians to take his body and bury it, lest they 
should leave the worship of their crucified Mas- 
ter, and begin .to worship Polgcarp. u Not con- 
sidering," says the epistle— ^that we can 
"never either forsake the worship of Christ; 
"who suffered for the salvation of those who 
11 



LETTER IV. 



"are saved in the whole world, the just for the 
"unjust, or worship any other. For we wok- 
"ship Him as being the Son of God; but the 
"martyrs we only love, as they deserve, for their 
" great affection for their King and Master, and 
"as being disciples and followers of their Lord, 
" whose partners and fellow disciples we desire 
" to be." 

The next witness whom I shall adduce is Ig- 
natius, who suffered martyrdom under the Em- 
peror Trajan, A. D. 107. In his Epistles the 
following passages occur.* 

The salutation of his Epistle to the Ephesians, 
is in these words — "Ignatius, who is also called 
" Theophorus, to the church which is at Ephe- 
"sus, in Asia, most deservedly happy 5 being 

* The author is aware, that the authenticity of the 
Epistles of Ignatius, has been called in question, as 
well as that of Barnabas, before quoted. It is impos- 
sible in a work written on the plan, and with the de- 
sign, of these Letters* to enter into the merits of con- 
troversies of this sort. It is sufficient for his purpose 
to say, that the great body of learned men consider 
the Epistle of Barnabas, and the smaller Epistles of 
Ignatius, (and from these alone he offers quotations) as^ 
in the main, the real works of the writers whose 
names they bear. Of this opinion was the eminently 
learned Unitarian, Dr. Lardmr* 



LETTER IT. 



123 



^blessed, through the greatness and fullness of 
"God the Father, and predestinated before the 
" world began, that it should be always unto an 
"enduring and unchangeable glory; being uni- 
" ted and chosen through his true passion, ac- 
cording to the will of the Father, and Jesus 
"Christ our God; all happiness, by Jesus 
" Christ, and his undefiled grace." In the 7th 
section of the same Epistle, he says, "There in 
Si one Physician, both fleshly and spiritual; 
"made and not made; God incarnate. 15 And 
again, in the 19th section— "Ignorance was 
"taken away, and the old kingdom abolished, 
"God himself appearing nr the form of 
"a man/ 5 

Toward the close of his Epistle to the Mag- 
nesians, he expresses himself thus— "Study, 
"therefore, to be confirmed in the doctrine of 
"our Lord, and of his Apostles; that whatso- 
ever ye do, ye may prosper, both in body and 
"spirit; in faith and charity; in the Son, and 
" in the Father, and in the Holy Spirit.*' 

He begins his Epistle to the Smyrneans thus 
—"I glorify God, even Jesus Christ, who has 
"given you such wisdom/ 5 And in the close of 



1.24 



LETTER IV. 



his Epistle to Po'ycarp. he says. ; i wish \ou 
1 all happiness in Jesus Christ ? our God." 

Ail the witnesses whom I have yet cited lived 
in the first century, and were personally ac- 
quainted with some of the Apostles* Their 
testimony, therefore, is Weighty and worthv of 
peculiar attention* ? 

IrmmuB) who was a disciple of Polycarp, and 
H'ho is said to havp suffered martyrdom ftbiMit 
A» D. 202, is an important and decisive witneii 
on the subject before ui. In the fourth b-ok of 
his work against the Heretics he begins by as- 
serting That i4 G0D WAS MADE MAN."— In the 
second book of thai work, and toward the close 
of the thirteenth chapter, as quoted in the last 
Letter, he says, "The Sox from eternity co- 
existed with tee Father, and from the 
"beginning ne always revealed the Father to 
"angels, and archangels, and principalities, and 
"powers, and to all to whom it pleased him to 
"reveal Him. 33 In the fourth book and tenth 
chapter of the same work, he asserts thai Je*us 
Christ was the God who interrogated Adam: 
who conferred with Noah, and gave him the 



LETTER IV* 



dimensions of the arki who spoke to Abraham; 
who brought destroying judgments on the in- 
habitants of Sodom; who directed Jacob in his 
journey, and addressed Moses out of the burning 
bush at Horeb* And, to give but one example 
more; in the third book, and sixteenth chap- 
ter of the same work, he says— "He (Christ) 
"is called Immanuel, lest we should think him 
"only a man/' And to illustrate and confirm 
this, it is worthy of notice* he immediately 
subjoins, with some other pointed passages of 
scripture, that remarkable text in Romans \x. 
5. "Qf whom , as concerning the flesh* Christ 
u came 3 who is over all God blessed forever f'** 
which he evidently interprets and applies, just 
as it is interpreted and applied by modem be- 
lievers in the Divinity of the Saviour. 

About the same time with Irenceus lived Tht- 
ophilus, Bishop of the church of Anlioch. He 
expressly acknowledges "Christ to be God, 
"and says the world was made by him: 
"for when the Father said, l Let us make 
; man in our image, after our likeness,' He 
; spake to no other but to his own Word, and 
"his own Wisdom, that is, to the Son, and tha 
11* 



i26 



LETTER IV. 



w Holy Spirit.' 5 — These he expressly stylet 
a "Trinity in the Godhead.* 

Justin Martyr i who, about A. D. 16£, sealed 
his faith with his blood, as the latter part of his 
name signifies, affords important and decisive 
testimony on this subject. In his Dialogue 
with Trypho the Jew, the latter is represented 
as finding fault with Christians for maintaining 
the Deity and worship of Christ. "To me it 
" appears," says Trypho, "a paradox, incapable 
"of any sound proof, to say that this Christ 
"was God before all time, and that then he 
* ; was made man and suffered: and to assert 
"that he was any thing more than a man, of 
" men, appears not only paradoxical, but fool- 
" ish." "I know," replies Justin, "that it 
51 appears paradoxical, and particularly to those 
"of your nation, who are determined neither 
" to know nor do the will of God, but to follow 
ri the inventions of your teachers, as God de- 
clares of you. However, if I could not de- 
"monstrate that He existed before all time, 
" being God, the Son of the Maker of the 
Universe, and was made man of the Virgin| 

^Theqph. &d Antolyc. Lib e II. p. 106, 114, 13CH 



LETTER m 



"yet as this personage was shewn by every 
"sort of proof to be the Christ of God, be the 
"quenion as it may respecting his Divinity and 
"■humanity, you have no right to deny that He 
"is the Christ of God, even if he were only a 
" mere man ; you could only say that I was 
" mistaken in my idea of his character* For 
"there are some who call themselves Chris- 
" tians, who confess him to be the Christ, but 
"only a mere man; with whom neither I, nor 
"the most who bear that name, agree; 
" because we are commanded by Christ himself, 
" not to obey the precepts of men, but his own 
"injunctions, and those of the holy prophets."* 
In another part of the same Dialogue, he speaks 
of Christ, as "the God of Israel who was 
"with Moses." 

* The true rendering of this passage in Justin Mar- 
tyr has been not a little controverted by Unitarians. 
I have given that which appears to me to be the true 
sense of it. But to stop to adjust disputes of this kind, 
in detail, would lead me far beyond the limits of these 
Letters, and defeat their great object. My readers 
may rest assured, that ?. will not knowingly mislead 
them with respect to a single quotation; and that I 
will, in no case* introduce, either witnesses or argu- 
ments, which appear to me to have been either set 
aside, or weakened, by Unitarian criticism* 



12S 



LETTER W. 



In his first Apology, he expresses himself 
thus— "We worship and adore the Father, 
6 'and that Son, who came from him, and the 
"Spirit of Prohhecy, honouring them in word 
"and in truth* Those who say that the So.i is 
"the Father, are convicted of being ignorant of 
" the Father, and of not knowing that the Fath- 
" er of ail hath a Son, who being the first begot- 
"ten Word of God, is also God." 

In his second Apology, he speaks thus — "We 
" worship and love the word of the Unbe- 
u gotten and ineffable God, who is with 
"God, because for our sakes he became man, 
"thai being also a partaker of our sufferings, He 
"might accomplish our cure." — Now, when it 
is recollected that these Apologies were intended 
to give general information concerning the faith 
and practice of the Christians in his day, we 
cannot suppose that he would be so insane as to 
lay before the Pagan rulers, in the face of the 
world, any doctrines but those which were known 
to be embraced by the great body of his fellow 
believers. 

Of the writings of JSklito, pastor of the church 
of Sardts, who flourished about A. D. 170, only 
& few fragments remain, as preserved by 



LETTER IV. 



129 



bins, Anastasius, and others. In one of these 
fragments, he speaks thus— " We are not wor- 
shippers of stones; but we are worshippers of* 
"the one God, who is before all, and in all, and 
"in his Christ, who is truly God, the eternal 
"WoRD.'^In another he expresses himself 
in this pointed manner. After saying that it 
was unnecessary to give further proofs of Christ's 
humanity*, he adds, "the miracles w T hich He 
" wrought after hU baptism, most forcibly de- 
" monstrate and confirm" his Divinity conceal- 
ed in flesh. Thu§ being at once perfect 
64 God and perfect man, he discovered his two 
"natures to us — his Divinity, by the miracles 
" which he performed in the three years after 
" his baptism- — his humanity, by the thirty ante- 
" cedent years, in which the meanness of the 
" flesh hid the tokens of his Divinity, though he 

" Was TRUE AND EVERLASTING GoD.'"T 

The following testimony of Athenagoras, who 
flourished about A. D. 175, is very express and 
pointed. "The Son of God is the Word of the 
"Father, in power and energy; by him, and 

* Chron. Alexander, ap Spanhem: Hist, Christ: p. 610. 
f AsfASTAsius, of Sina, as quoted by Caye, in his Huty* 
rfa Liter aria, p. 43. 



130 



LETTER IV. 



" through him were all things created. The 
"Father and the Son are one. If you desire a 
"further explanation of the meaning of Son in 
44 this point, I will endeavour to give you a brief 
"one. He is the Firstborn of the FATH- 
ER, but NOT AS EVER BEGINNING TO EXIST — - 

64 who is not filled with admiration, 75 says he, 
"that we who declare God the Father, and God 
44 the Son, and the Holy Spirit, shewing both 
" the power of their Unity, and the distinction 
44 of their order, should be called perverse Athe- 
ists?"-— "We are not Atheists, who reckon as 
44 God, the Maker of the Universe, and his 
44 Word who proceedeth from him."* 

Tatian, a disciple of Justin Martyr, in reply t© 
the accusations of the heathen, says, "we do not, 
44 O Grecians, act the part of fools, nor do we tell 
44 you idle stories, when we declare that Gob 

44 WAS BORN IN THE HUMAN FORM.f 

Contemporary with Athenagoras, was Clernem 
Alexandrinus, whose testimony is no less expli- 
cit on the subject under consideration. In his 

*Athenagor. Legatio. p. 11. 24. 
^Tatian, contra Grcecosj p. 159. 



LETTER IT. 



131 



pLedagogae, book first, chapter second, he says^ 
"O children, our Master is like to God his 
u Father, whose Son Fie is, without sin. He is 
"God in the form of max, immaculate/' 
Again, in the third book, and twelfth chapter, 
of the same work, he thus exhorts — u Let us 
"give thanks to the only Father and Son; to the 
44 Son and the Father; to the Son our Teach- 
er and Master, with the Holy* Spirit; one in 
46 all respects; in whom are ail things; by whom 
"all things are one; by whom is eternal exis- 
tence; whose members we are; whose is the 
"glory, and the ages; who is the perfect good, 
"the perfect beauty, ail-wise and all-just, to 
"whom be glory both now and ever. Amen!'' 
And a little after, in the same work, he pours 
out the following exhortation — "Gather tcgeth- 
" er thy simp!e children, to praise in a holy 
" manner, to celebrate without guile, Christ the 
"Leader of children, the eternal Logos, the in- 
" finite Age, the eternal Light, the Fountain of 
" mercy, &c. — -Filled with the dew of the Spir- 
"it, let us sing together sincere praises, genuine 
" hymns, to Christ our king, &c.!"' The same 
writer, in his Exhortation to the Gentiles, styles 
Christ, "the living God, who was then wor- 



i-fi 



LETTER IV. 



"shipped and adored. Believe," says he, "0 
"man, in Him who is both man and God: be- 
" lieve, O man, in Him who suffered death, and 
"yet is adored as the living God."* 

About the same time, that is, toward the dose 
of the second century, flourished -Andronicus, the 
martyr, in the account of whose martyrdom, it 
is represented as having been objected to him 
by the heathen judge, that Christ, whom he pro- 
fessed to invoke and to worship, was a man, who 
had suffered under the government of Pontius 
Pilate, and that the records of his sufferings 
were then extant. It seems that the worship of 
Christ was so openly avowed by the christians^ 
and so universally known to the heathen, that at 
every turn it was objected to thorn; and their 
answer was always the same; "That they wor- 
"shipped Him, indeed; not, however, as a mere 
"man, but as a God, the Son of God by na- 
"ture, and of the same substance with the 
" Father."! 

The testimony of the eloquent Tertullian, who 
flourished about A. D. 200, on this subject^ is 

* Clem. Alex. Protreptic, p. 84. 

f Baroniij Annates. Acta &ndroniei-~>an. 190, 



LETTER IV. 



as direct and indubitable as cati well be imagin- 
ed. Those who read his treatise against Bthx- 
eas, will no longer have any remaining doubt. 
Praxeas was a heretick, who taught that tiie 
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, were one 
arid the same; in oiher words, he denied all dis- 
tinction of Persons in the Godhead, maintaining 
the same error which was afterwards revived, 
and has been since generally known, under the 
name of Sabellianism* Tertullian entered the 
lists against him, and wrote a treatise, in which* 
with great decision and force, he supported what 
were then, and have ever siece been considered, 
as the Orthodox opinions on this subject. In 
this treatise he speaks pointedly and clearly of 
the Trinity in Unity; of the Father, Son and 
Holy Ghost, yet one God: He speaks of the 
Lord Jesus Christ as both God and man, as son 
of man and Son of God, and called Jesus Christ. 
He ?peaks also of the Holy Spirit, the Comfort- 
er, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe 
in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. And he 
explicitly; declares, not only that he and those 
around him received this faith; but that it had 
ootained from file beginning, antecedently to any 
former heretics; and much more antecedently 1$ 

12 



1U 



LETTER IV, 



Praxeas, who was of yesterday. The following 
is a small specimen of his language, "The Fa* 
"ther is God, the Son is God, and the Holy 
^ Ghost is God, and every one of them is God* 
^ The name of the Father is God Almighty, the 
" Most High, Lord of Hosts, &c. These names 

" BELONG TO THE SON LIKEWISE*"* 

The same Father, in his work De Pmscrip- 
iione, gives a creed, which he calls Regula 
Fidei, in which is found the following article. 
" We believe that Christ was the Word, by 
"whom God made the worlds, and who, at vari- 
ous times, appeared to the patriarchs and pro- 
phets." And to this "rule of faith" the fol- 
lowing explicit declaration is affixed — "This is 
"the Rule of Faith which was appointed by 
" Christ, and which admits of no dispute among 
" us, but such as hereticks raise, and such as 
"make men hereticks." 

Minucius Felix, who lived about A. D. 220 5 
taking notice of the calumny circulated against 
the Christians, that they worshipped a merd 
man, as God, thus repels the charge — "You are 

i Tertulliani Opera. Jkgalt. p. 500 — 519^ 



LETTER IV- 135 

ki greatly mistaken in ascribing to our religion 
"the worship of a guilty man, who was crucifi- 
"ed; and in thinking, either, that a guilty man 
" should, or that a mere man could, be acknow- 
ledged by us as God. He is miserable indeed 
:i whose hope is wholly in a mortal man; for his 
"help perishes with the destruction of the mor. 
'"tal nature. 5 '* 

Qrigen. who flourished about A. D. 230, and 
who undoubtedly was the most learned and able 
divine of his day, thus expresses himself on the 
subject now under consideration — "When you 
"confess one God, and assert in the same con- 
cession that the Father, the Son and the Holy 
"Ghost are One God, how perplexed, how diffi- 
cult, how inextricable does this seem to the vn- 
"believing!- And again, when you say that the 
"Lord of Glory was crucified, and that it was 
" the Son of man who descended from heaven, 
" How perplexed," cries he, "who hears, but 
"hears not with faith; how difficult do these 
^things appear! because they are them- 
selves in an error. But do thou hold fast/ 
^nor entertain a doubt concerning this faitb 3 

* Mmucix Octav. Apolog: 31, 



18£ 



LETTER IV. 



"knowing that God hath shewed this way of 
"faith unto thee."* And again; "There are 
" some, indeed, who make a declaration concern- 
ing the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, 
-'hut not in sincerity nor in truth* Such are 
"all hereticks, who indeed profess the Father 
"and Son and Spirit, but not in a right and be- 
lieving manner: for they either separate the 
"Son from the Father, that they may ascribe 
-*Otie nature to the Father, and another to the 
"Son; or they erroneously confound them, by 
" thinking to make of three a compound God: or 
"by supposing only three different names. 
"But he who rightly confesses the truth, will 
"indeed ascribe to the Father, Son and Holy 
"Ghost, their distinct properties, but confess 
"that there is no difference as to nature or 

" SUBSTANCE*'"! 

Speaking of the ordinance of Baptism, Ori- 
gin says, "When we come to the grace of Bap- 
"tism, renouncing all ether Gods and Lords, 
"we acknowledge one God only, the Father, the 
"Son, and the Holy Ghost." And again; 
"I believe that faith of the Father, the Son, 

* HorniL VL in Ezod, f In Episi, ad Rcmanos* cap. X. 



LETTER IT. 



137 



:i and the Holy Spirit, which is believed by all 

WHO ARE UNITED TO THE CHURCH OF GoD."* 

Cyprian, who was contemporary with Origen, 
and who, though inferiour to him, in learning, 
greatly excelled him in pastoral zeal and fideli* 
ty, and in general Orthodoxy, expresses himself 
on the subject under consideration in a way 
which cannot be mistaken. 

In his work on the Unity of the Church, he 
speaks thus — 4t The Lord saith, I and my Father 
44 are one; and again, concerning the Father, the 
44 Son and the Holy Ghost, it is written, These 
44 Three are One, 1 Whoever does not hold this 
44 unity, does not hold the law of God; does not 
44 hold the faith of the Father and of the Son^ 

* Homil. VIII. in Exod, XX. It is freely granted that 
Origen, on same occasions, expressed himself concern^ 
ing the Saviour's Person, in a manner which an accurate 
theologian would pronounce exceptionable, and unsafe. 
But when he was called to spea.k directly and carefully 
on the subject; and especially when he undertook to 
say what the church believed, he employed the 
language above cited. Unless we make him a com- 
mon liar, and a liar, too. without any known temptation 
to depart from the truth, we must suppose that the 
Church at large, received and held fast the creed 
which he declares they did. 

j2# 



138 



LETTER IT. 



44 and does not hcld the truth unto salva- 
44 TiON/* — Again, be sajs, "Christ was God 
64 and man, that he might be the fitter to be the 
44 Mediator between them." Ar*d again, "This 
u Christ is our God; and being a mediator 
"between two, he put on the man, that he 
44 might lead him to God his Father. Christ 
44 became man, that man might become like 
44 Christ."! 

In a Council at Carthage, called to deliberate 
on the re-baptizing of heritics, and in which 
Cyprian presided, one of the sentences pronoun- 
ced was the following. "Our Lord said, Go 
64 and baptize all nations, in the name of the Fa- 
u ther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost* 
44 When, therefore, we plainly see that heretics 
44 have neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the 
64 Holy Spirit, they ought, on coming into our 
44 mother Church, to be re-born and baptized." 
Another sentence pronounced in the same Coun- 
cil was equally decisive — l4 The Lord Jesus 
44 Christ, our God, and the Son of God the Fa- 
rther, hath built his Church on a rock, not on 

* Be Umtat. Eceles: } 5. 

4 Adver* Judmos* Lib II. sect* lO.etcle VmiUldoU Sect.B* 



LETTER IV. 



139 



" heresy. Wherefore those who are out of the 
" Church, and stand in opposition to Christ, 
"scatter his flock, and cannot he considered as 
4t baptized." In conformity with the spirit of 
these declarations was the unanimous decision 
of the Council. 

The same devoted martyr, in another place, 
expresses himself in this pointed manner. "If 
" any one could be baptized among the heretics, 
"he might also obtain remission of sins: and if 
*he obtained remission of sins, be sanctified,, 
"and made the temple of God. I ask 3 of what 
"God? If of the Creator; he could not^ who 
"did not believe in him: if of Christ; neither 
" could he be his temple, who denies Christ to 
"be God: if of the Holy Spirit; since these 
" three are one, how could the Holy Spirit 
" be reconciled to him, who is an enemy to the 
" Father and the Son?-'** 

It is very remarkable, too, that Cyprian, like 
Iren&u$, and others before him, having occasion 
to quote that strong passage in favour of the di- 
vinity of Christ, -which is found Romans ix. 5. 
instead of doubting its appropriateness 5 or adopt- 



149 



LETTER IV- 



ing any thing like the modern Unitarian per- 
versions, falls in exactly with the interpretation 
of our English translators, and makes it to read, 
" Of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ 
u came, who is over all God blessed forever"* 

Dionysius of Alexandria, was one of the zeal- 
ous champions for the truth, who opposed the 
heresy of Paul of Samosata, which will be men- 
tioned in the next Letter. He is strongly com- 
mended by Basil,] for always using the following 
form of doxology — u To God the Father, and 
64 the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy 
44 Spirit, be glory and dominion, now and for- 
u ever, world without end. Amen!" — The same 
Dionysius, in writing against Paul of Samosata, 
speaks in such pointed and unequivocal terms as 
these — "Christ is uncreated — He is the Crea- 
u tor of all things — He is God by nature — 
M He is consubstantial with the Father — He is 
w immutable, as being God — He is God over 
"all, our refuge — He is the Lord and God 
u of Israel, &c." 

JVovatian, who was contemporary with Cyp- 
rian, is one of the most powerful witnesses 

* Contra Judceos, L. II. § 6. 

f Basil, de Spirit* Sancto, cap. 29f. 



LETTER IV. 



chat coifld be wished for on the subject before us. 
He left a treatise expressly ^On the Trinity ^ 
in which that doctrine is asserted, illustrated, 
confirmed by numerous quotations from scrip- 
ture, and zealously maintained, with a clearness 
worthy of the most thorough Trinitarian, of the 
Athanasian school. The structure of the trea- 
tise is such, that it would be difficult to make 
satisfactory extracts, without extracting a num- 
ber of pages. Mjvatian contends for three Per- 
sons in the Godhead, cautioning his readers 
against Sabellianism, on the one hand, and 
Tritheism on the other. He maintains the eter- 
nal generation of the Son: and that Christ is 
very God and very man, in the same mysterious 
and glorious Person. And, finally, he maintains 
the divine personality of the Holy Spirit. 
And, what is worthy of notice, he arrays, in sup- 
port of these various doctrines, very much the 
same series of texts of scripture, to which the 
modern advocates of the same doctrines are 
accustomed to resort. It is evident that those 
scriptures which are now deemed decisive on 
these points, were, in general, viewed in the 
same light by the Orthodox sixteen hundred 
years ago. 



U9 



LETTER IV. 



About the time of Novation, lived Amobius, a 
distinguished father of the church of Africa, 
This writer brings in the heathen as objecting to 
the worship of Christ. "Our Gods," say they, 
"are not displeased with you for worshipping 
"the Almighty God; but that you make a God 
"of one that was born a man, and put to death 
"by the punishment of the cross, (an infamous 
"punishment, only inflicted on vile men,) and 
" because you believe him to be still alive, and 
"make daily supplications to him." To this he 
answers, first, upon their own principles, that, 
admitting it were so, that Christ was only a 
mere man; yet he might with more reason de- 
serve to be worshipped for his good deeds to 
mankind, than either their Bacchus or Ceres, 
or JEsculapius, or Minerva, or Triptolemus, or 
Hercules, &c. But, secondly, he answers more 
closely, upon true christian principles, that 
the reason of their worshipping Christ, was 
the certain knowledge that He was the true 
God, whom they could not but worship and hon- 
our. He proceeds — "What then? suppose any 
"one, raving, should ask, Is Christ Grod? We 
"will reply, He is God, and God of the inmost 
" powers of the soul.""* 

* AwoB. Contra Gentes— Lib; L 30, 3B\ 



LETTER I'Y. 



The same objection is proposed by Lactantius* 
n learned and eloquent father, who was a disci- 
pie of Arnobius. "They (the heathen) are 
" woiht," says he, a to object to us the sufier- 
"ings of Christ by way of reproach, that we 
" worship a man, and one that was put to a no- 
torious death by men." In replying to which 
objection, after having largely set forth the rea- 
sons of the Redeemers incarnation and suffer- 
ings, he particularly answers that part of the 
objection which respects their worshipping him, 
and pleads that they worshipped him as one 
God with the Father. "Kor," says he, 
44 when we speak of God the Father, and 
"God the Son, we do not speak of .different 
44 natures, or separate the one from the other; 
44 for neither can He be a Father without a Son, 
i 4 or the Son be divided from the Father: for- 
44 asmuch as He cannot be called a Father with- 
44 out a Son, nor the Son be begotten without a 
u Father. Seeing, therefore, a Father makes a 
44 Son, and a Son makes a Father, they have 
"both oxe mixd, and one spirit, and oxb 

U SUBSTANCE."* 

k L act ain't. Div, Instit, Lib e IV. cap. 29- 



144 



LETTER IT. 



The celebrated Confession of Faith of Grego- 
ry Thaumaiurgus, who flourished about A. D, 
235, precludes all doubt with respect to his 
opinions. It is as follows. fc4 Tuere is one 
" God, the Father of the living Word, of ihe 
"subsisting Wisdom and Power, and of Him 
"who is his eternal Image; the perfect Beget* 
44 ter of Him that is perfect, the Father of the 
"only begotten Son. There is one Lord, the 
" billy, of the Only, God of God, the Character 
"and Image of the Godhead; the powerful 
" Word, the comprehensive Wisdom, by which 
"all things were made, and the Power that gave 
" being to the whole creation; the true Son of 
" the true Father, the Invisible of the Invisible, 
" tiie Incorruptible of the Incorruptible, the Im« 
" mortal of the Immortal, and the Eternal of Him 
" that is eternal. There is one Holy Ghost, 
"having its subsistence of God, which appeared 
" through the Son to mankind, the perfect Image 
"of the perfect Son; the life giving Life; the 
"holy Fountain; the Sanctity, and the Author, 
"of sanctification; by whom God the Father 
" is made manifest; who is over all, and in all ; 
c and God the Son, who is through all. A 
" perfect Trinity, which neither in glory* 



LETTER IV. 145 



,fi eternity, or wisdom is divided, or separated 
*' from itself."* 

I shall only add to this list a short quotation 
from Athanasius, one of the most celebrated Fa- 
thers of the fourth century, and a great cham- 
pion for the Divinity of Christ, and a Trinity of 
Persons in the God lead. I do not make the 
extract so much for the purpose of enabling you 
to decide what the opinions of Athanasius him- 
self were on these important subjects; for, that 
he was zealous in support of the Orthodox opin- 
ions. Unitarians themselves have granted witb a 
out hesitation* But my principal object is to 
adduce his testimony with respect to what was 
the uniform doctrine of the church before his 
time — fc4 We see that this was the tradition, and 
" the doctrine, and the faith of the church unU 
"jversal, from the beginning; which our Lord 
"himself delivered, which the Apostles preach- 
"ed, and which the Fathers preserved. For in 
"(his is the church founded, and he who ialls 
"from it, can neither be a Christian, f nor 

H DESERVE THE NAME OF A CHRISTIAN. That 

" tats is the very faith of the church, mey (th% 

* See Cave's Lives of the Father— Avt\ Gregory Than 
maturgus. 

is 



LETTER IT. 



" opposers of the Trinity) may learn from the 
44 commission which our Lord gave to his Apos- 
" ties, when sending them forth. He commanded 
44 them to lay this foundation in the church; 
41 saying, Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing 
44 them in the name of the Father, and of the 
44 Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But the Apos« 
46 ties goi *g forth taught in this very iru n tr; 
"and this is the doctrine which is preached 

" THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE CHURCH UNDER 

"heaven."* Again; "The Apostles, going 
"•forth, straightway with the most perfect har- 
44 mony preached, that Christ was the Son of 
-God; that he was born in Bethlehem, of the 
"seed of David, according to the flesh; that he 
"was made like unto men, and crucified for men 
" under Pontius Pilate. They declared, that 
"the same Person was God and man; the 
"Son of God, and the Son of man; from heaven 
"and from earth; impassible and passible; and 
i; that He was no other; not two persons; not two 
* 4 hypostases; not two objects of adoration."! 

In accordance with all this, it is remarkable 
that the Martyr^ who s?]ffeied in the second. 

* Ad Serapionem. 

t Unum esse Christum — Opera. Tom, 1. p, 666, 



LETTER IV, 



147 



third and fourth centuries, were generally wont, 
in their last moments, to pray to Christ, and 
to resign their spirits into his hands, as their 
Creator and Redeemer. Of this I might fill a 
number of pages with examples, from the wri- 
tings of EusebiuS) and Ambrose, and from various 
collections of what are called, the "Acts of the 
"Martyrs" In those solemn and interesting 
seasons, we find them pouring out their devo- 
tions in such language as the following* "0 Lord, 
" God of Heaven and earth, Je^us Christ, I 
"bow my neck to thee as a sacrifice, who iivest 
u to all eternity: to whom belongs honour and 
"power forever and ever. Amen."— And again, 
— "I give thanks to the God of all kingdoms. 
"Lord Jesus Christ, we serve thee. Thou art 
"our hope. Thou art the hope of Chris- 
tians. Most holy God, God Almighty, we 
"give thanks unto thee for thy great name." 
"Again; "I beseech thee, O Christ; I give 
41 thanks unto thee; deliver me, O Christ. In 
"thy name I suffer; I suffer for a moment; I 
"suffer willingly: let me not be confounded, O 
"Christ!" Once more; — "O Lord Jesus 
"Christ, my Saviour and my God, command 
" hat my spirit may be received, for I desire 



LETTER IT. 



u to obtain the crown which thy holy angel 
46 hath shewed me*"* 

So much for the direct teslimony of the early 
Fathers. In the substance of this testimony 
they all coftctm. I cannot recollect a single 
Writer, prior to the council of JVice, who so 
much as estimates, either, that he himself deni- 
ed the Divinty of Christ, or the Holy Trinity: 
or that the Christian Church denied it. The 
extract! which I have given, are a Fair speci- 
men of the manner hi which the writers of that 
period express themselves on the subject, when 
it comes before (hem* In the next Letter, their 
tptiffiony, to tha iima amount, but under a &\£ 
ferent aspect, will be briefly considered* 

* Baron, an. 25$. an. 301. an. 302. an. 303. &c. Em* 
De Martyr. Palmt. c. n. Ambeoi. Exhort, ad Virgin^* I 



LETTER V, 



Subject CorMnued^-Testimony drawn from the Her^ 
esies of the fir si four centuries— Remarks on thai 
testimony* 



Christian Brethren, 

The series of extracts from the writings of th$ 
€arly Fathers, which I laid before you in th€ 
preceding Letter, have, I trust, convinced you, 
that the doctrines of a Trinity of Persons in the 
Godhead* and of the real and proper Divinity 
of the Son, were universally maintained in the 
primitive Church, and deemed of fundamental 
importance* But, for the purpose of illustra- 
ing this fact still further, I design, in the pres^ 
ent Letter, to inquire what those opinions were 
o n these subjects, which, during the first three 
or four centuries, were pronounced Heresies 
and of which the abettors were cast out of the 
church, as unworthy of a place among thos£- 
i^ho bore the christian name, 
13* 



LETTER V. 



If it be a fact, as suggested in my first Let- 
ter, that Orthodoxy, both in its opinions and 
spirit, is by no means congenial with depraved 
human nature, and that the leading features of 
Unifarianism have ever been most pleasing to a 
wordlv taste; then we might naturally expect 
to find some of these features earl) beginning to 
disclose themselves. Accordingly, various forms 
of heresy respecting the Person and work of 
the Blessed Redeemer, began to make their ap- 
pearance very soon after the Christian church 
was iestablished; and have scarcely ceased, 
from that time to the present, to tarnish her 
lustre, and to disturb her peace. Some of the 
most remarkable of these will be cursorily noti- 
ced, and a brief account given of the estimation 
in which they were held, and the manner in 
which they were treated, by the great body of 
believers. 

The first class of hereticks that I shall men- 
tion, is the Cerinthians* They were so called 
from Cerinthus, who is alledged to have been a 
disciple of Simon Magus, and who lived in the 
apostolick age* Without entering into detail 
concerning the opinions of this man 7 on other 



LETTER V. 



151 



subjects, it is sufficient to state, that he denied 
the Divinity of Jesus Christ; believing that 
Jesus was a mere man, born of Joseph and 
Mary; that a superangelick being, or influ- 
ence, was united to this man, at his baptism^ 
and thereby constituted him the Christ or Mes- 
siah; that this union, however, was not so com- 
plete as to make one person; and that it was 
the mere man who suffered on the cross, — the 
superangelick being having abandoned him, 
before he suffered. What kind of reception 
these opinions met with from the christians of 
that day, the following testimonies will be suf- 
ficient to shew. Irenceus expressly declares f 
that the Evangelist "John designed by his Gos- 
" pel to remove the error which was sown among 
"men by Cerinthus" Jerome, quite as directly 
and strongly, bears witness to the same fact, 
* 4 Last of all," says he, "at the request of the 
64 bishops of Asia, John wrote his Gospel against 
" Cerinthus and other hereticks, and espe- 
"ciallj against the doctrine of the Ebionites 7 
" then, beginning to appear, who say that Christ 
64 did not exist before Mary"* Irenceus also re- 
lates, that the Apostle John, while he resided at^ 

* Catalog. Script, Eccks* in Joanrh- 



LETTER V. 



Ephesus, once going to bathe, and perceiving 
that Cerinthus was in the bath, came out again? 
hastily, saying, "Let us flee, lest the bath 
€; should fall, while Cerinthus. an en£my of 
'the truth, is within.'^ 

The Cerinthians were soon succeeded by the 
Ebionites, who appeared early in the second 
-century, and took their name from Ebion^ a dis- 
ciple of Cerinthus, who seems to have^adopted 
all his leading opinions* At any rate, he taught 
that Jesus Christ was a mere mam Dr. Priest" 
ley ha^ laboured much to shew, that the great 
body of the early Jewish christians were Unita* 
nans; nnd that they were called Ebioniles, not 
from Ebion, their ailed ged leader, but from their 
poverty; being generally a poor and mean peo- 
ple. Hence he would make us believe, that they 
were by no means considered as hereiicks; but 
that they formed the mass of the Jewish con- 
verts to Christianity, during the apostolick age, 
and for some time afterwards. To those who 
have any disposition to adopt this opinion, I 
would recommend the perusal of the Revd. Dr. 
Jamiesorfs Vindication of the Doctrine of Scrip a 
ture, and of the Primitive Faith, concerning " :> c- 

* Cmtra Hwreses- Lib. HI, § 4| 



LETTER T. 



153 



Deity of Christ; and also Bishop Hartley- s 
Tracts in controversy with Dr. Priestly, In 
these works, if I do not mistake, they will 
find the most ample evidence that Dr. Priest" 
ley's allegation is totally unfounded; and that 
all antiquity testifies, that the Ebionites were a 
mere heretical sect, and not acknowledged 
as christians at all by the Orthodox church of 
their day. Irenceus, speaking of this sect, ex- 
presses himself thus: "They who say that he 
"was merely a man engendered of Joseph, die; 
"continuing in the bondage of the former diso= 
"bedience; having to the last no conjunction 
"with the Word of God the Father, nor receiv- 
u ing freedom through the Son, according to 
"that saying of his own, If the Son, Oierifore^ 
"make you free, ye shall be free indeed. But 
"not knowing Him who is the Immanuel of the 
" Virgin, they arE deprived of his gift, 
" which is eternal LIFE.*'* Again he says, 
" T ne truly spiritual disciple will judge the 
^'' Jews. will judge the Marcionites, will judge 
64 the Valentinirtns, (both of whom are acknowl- 
4 4 !edged to have been hereticks) will judge the 
H Ebionites . How can they be saved, unlesa 

* Lib. XIX. cap. 22, 



- ■ 



LETTER V. 



li He who wrought their salvation on earth be 
"GodP* — Teriullian thus speaks of this 
heresy — "John in his Epistle calls those chiefly 
" Anti-christs, who denied that Church had 
" come in the flesh, and who did not think that 
"Jesus was the Son of God. The former Mar* 
"cion held, the latter Ebion.V Besides these 
testimonies, Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandria 
nus, Origen, and Jerome, all decisively speak of 
Ehion as a heretick, and most of them speak 
of him, as separated from believers, and out of 
the way of salvation, Jerome, in one place 
speaks of him as "that heresiarch Ebion."J 

In the second century also appeared Marcion^ 
an Asiatick, who being expelled from his fath- 
ers church for immorality, went to Rome, and 
espoused the cause of heresy. He denied the 
plenary Divinity of Christ, and taught that he 
had not a real, but only an apparent human 
body. Marcion seems to have taken his sys- 
tem from Cerdo, whom he found at Rome; and 
in his opinions respecting the person of Christ, 
Valentinus, Basilides, Bardasanes, and Manes, 
all of the same century, appear to have sub- 

* Lib. IV. cap. 33.4. f Be Prescript, c. 33. 
X In Galat. III. 



LETTER V. 



15S 



stanHally concurred. Martian, like modem 
Unitarians, mutilated the Gospels, and ind .-od 
the whole Bible, with great freedom, especially 
casting out every thing relating ta the genea^l- 
gy of Christ. Accordingly we find this m n 
stigmatized as a heretick, not only by Iren* 
(bus, in terms of strong reprobation; but also by 
Justin Martyr, who formally opposed and con- 
futed his error*, as destructive heresies 5 
by Terlidlian, who wrote several books agai 
him, in which he condems him as a gross here- 
tick, and speaks of him as having departld 

FROM THE FAITH AND THE CHURCH OF ChEIST; 

and by Poly carp, who not only denounced him 
as a heretick, but when Martian, mortified at 
Polycarp's treatment of him, said,— "Polycarp 
" acknowledge us;" the holy man of God replfc 
i4 ed — "I do acknowledge thee as the first bor$ 
"of Sat ax." This anecdote is related by Iren- 
am, who was nearly contemporary both with 
Polycarp and Martian* 

Concerning this heretick, Cyprian also writes 
in the following manner. "Our Lord, after his 
" resurrection, instructing his disciples how they 

* Contra Hcereses. Lib. III. cap. 3» 4, 



156 



"should baptize, says, Go ye, therefore, and 
" teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of 
"the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost, Here he gives an intimation of the 
" Trinity, in whose sacrament the nations 
""vere'to be baptized* Does Mircion believe 
u this Trinity? Does he believe the same Fa- 
rmer, the Creator, as we believe in? Does he 
"acknowledge the same only Son, Christ, born 
u of the virgin Mary, who being the Word, 
"was made flesh, and suffered for our sins? 
" Marcion, and all other hereticks, held a very 
."different faith."* 

Toward the close of the second century, Theo- 
dofus, the currier, appeared at Rome, and pub* 
iickly taught that Jesus Christ was a mere man. 
He was immed.mtely excommunicated from the 
church; and by all the principal writers of that 
time, and for several centuries afterwards, who 
b J occasion to speak of heresies, he is denoun- 
ced, not only as a herettck, but as one of the 
worst sort. Yet he and his followers, of course, 
asserted, like modern Unitarians, that theirs 
was the true Apostolical doctrine. In answer 



* EpuL 73. 



LETTER V. 



to this plea, as made by certain Unitarians, 
some time after Theodotus, Cuius, a Presbyter 
of Rome, thus speaks — ifc They affirm that all 
44 the primitive christians, and the Apostles 
44 themselves, both received and taught these 
44 things which are spoken by them: and indeed 
44 that the true preaching (as they think) was 
44 preserved even to the time of Victor, who was 
44 the thirteenth Bishop of the city of Rome 
44 from Peter; but that from the time of Zep- 
44 hyrinus, who succeeded Victor, the truth was 
44 adultered. And perhaps what they assert 
54 might appear credible, were it not that, in the 
44 first place, the Holy Scriptures directly op- 
;4 pose them. Then there are writings of cer- 
t; tain brethren, prior to the age of Victor, which 
u they have written in defence of the truth, 
54 against the Gentiles, and the hereticKs of 
44 their own time. I mean Justin, arid Miltiades^ 
t 4 and Tatian, and Clement, and many others 
44 besides; in all whose books the Divini- 
4t ty of Christ is maintained. For who is 
44 ignorant of the writings of Irenceus, and Meli- 
44 to, and the rest, proclaiming Christ to be 
44 both God an© man? Of which number are 
44 the Psalms and Hymns composed by the faith- 



22* 



LETTER T. 



"ful in the earliest times, which celebrate 
u Christ the word of God, ascribing Divinity 
u to Him. Since, then, the ecclesiastical doc- 
" trine was preached so many years back, how 
"can it be that all, even to the time of Victor, 
" have proclaimed that doctrine of which they 
" speak? How are they not ashamed to frame 
w such falsehoods concerning Victor, when they 
" certainly know that Victor excommunicated 
" Theodotus the currier, the chief and parent of 
"this God-denying apostacy; being the first 
"that called Christ a mere man? For if Victor, 
"as they pretend, was persuaded of the truth 
" of their blasphemous doctrine, how did 
* ; he cast out Theodotus, the inventor of the 
"heresy?"* 

Contemporary with Theodotus was Artemon, 
who seems to have adopted a system very much 
the same with that of the Byzantine currier. 
He also was opposed by several of the principal 
fathers, condemned as a heretick, and exclu- 
ded from the communion of the christian church. 

About A. D. 220, arose JVoetus, of Smyrna. 
an obscure man, of small talents, who broached 

* Eu$eb. Lib. V. cap. 28, 



LETTER V, 



159 



certain opinions concerning Jesus Christ, which 
were a few years afterward adopted, in sub- 
stance, by Sabellius, of Africa, from whom, on 
account of his superior eloquence and conspi- 
cuity, the system which he maintained, has 
since received the name of Sabellianism* Sa~ 
hellius rejected all distinction of Persons in God* 
He alledged that the Trinity was only nominal^ 
or modal, that is, that Father, Son and Holy 
Ghost, were only three names or offices of one 
and the same Hypostasis, or Person. He affirm- 
ed that Jesus Christ was truly God and man; 
but that the one, undivided Deity was incarnate 
in him. And hence he and his followers were 
sometimes called Patripassians, because they 
considered the Father as incarnate in Christ, 
and were charged with believing that the eter- 
nal Father might suffer. This doctrine the 
pious of that day considered as striking at the 
foundation of the system of redemption, and 
therefore condemned it as a fatal heresy. JVbe- 
tus was solemnly excommunicated from the 
church, and his doctrine stigmatized as heret- 
ical, by two successive synods; and a few years 
afterward, Sabellius, and his opinions, received 
the same treatment. A modification of the same 



160 



LETTER V. 



system having been adopted, about this time, by 
Beryllus, Bishop of Bozrah, he was opposed by 
Origen. and excluded from the body of the Or- 
thodox. He remained, however, but a short 
time under this discipline; for, professing to be 
convinced by the reasoning of his antagonist, he 
returned to the communion of the church, and 
his party became extinct. 

The heresy of Praxeas was transiently noti- 
ced in the preceding Letter. He was in sub" 
stance a Sabellian; that is, he denied the dis- 
tinction of Persons in the Godhead to be any 
thing more than nominal. He was formally con- 
demned by Ztphyrinus, Bishop of Rome. In 
consequence of his condemnation, he wrote and 
signed a recantation of his errors. But not 
long afterward he begau to propagate them 
anew. "For some time/' says TertuUian, "in 
" a hypocritical manner he lay hid, craftily re- 
staining life under ground; but at length he 
44 again burst forth," and it appears was again 
cast out of the church. Tertullian opposed him 
with zeal and vigour, and, if we may judge by 
a variety of circumstances, seems to have driv- 
en him off the field with triumph. 



LETTER V, 



The next conspicuous advocate of erroneous 
opinions concerning the Saviour's Person, was 
Paul of Samosata. He was a vain, arrogant, 
artful, and licentious man, who gave great un- 
easiness to such of his neighbouring brethren as 
were friendly to exemplary piety. Paul coinci- 
ded in opinion, almost entirely, with modem 
Socinians; in other words, he considered Christ 
as a mere man. But when his brethren conve- 
ned to ascertain his sentiments, and give judg- 
ment concerning them, he manifested so much 
skill in the arts of concealment and equivocation^ 
that, for a considerable time, they could decide 
nothing in his case. In the first Council that 
was convened to try him, he went so far as to 
declare, on oath, that he held no such opinions as 
were imputed to him; but that he adhered to 
the Apostolical decrees and doctrines. This 
gave so much pleasure to the members of the 
council, that, before its dissolution, they united 
in singing a hymn, in which they celebrated 

THE PUBISES OF THE SAVIOUR AS GoD. But it 

was soon found that he had acted a disingenuous 
part, and was beginning again to propagate the 
opinions which he had disavowed. Another 
Council was Galled. Again he denied and pre- 
14* 



162 



LETTER V. 



varicated. At length Malchian, one of the cler- 
gy of the church of Antioch, had the address and 
the fidelity to interrogate him in such a manner, 
and to press him with such effect, that he could 
no longer escape detection. He was unani- 
mously CONDEMNED AS A HERETICK, and DE- 
POSED FROM THE MINISTRY. The bishops wllO 

composed this Council also addressed an Epistle 
to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, giving 
them an account of the opinions and character 
of Paul, for their information and warning; in 
which they exhibit a shocking picture of his 
conduct as well as his principles. What Euse- 
bius thought of the opinions of this man. will ap- 
pear from his saying concerning him — "The 
i; leader of the heresy at Antivch was discover- 
ed, and by all manifestly convicted of another 
tt doctrine than that which is preached by the 

" WHOLE CATHOLICK ChURCH UNDER HEAV- 

^ en. 5 '"* It seems to have been on this occasion, 
and prompted by the mortifying scenes to which 
the heresy of Paid had given rise, that Felix, 
bishop of Rome, addressed a letter to Maximus 
of Alexandria, in which he thus speaks — "We 
u believe that our Saviour, Jesus Christ, wa~ 

* Euseb* Hist Lib, VII. cap, 



LETTER V. 



71 born of the Virgin Mary; we believe that he 
" himself is the eternal God, and the Word, 
44 and not a man, whom God hath taken into 
"himself, so as that man should be distinct from 
" him : for the Son of God, being perfect God 5 
" was also made perfect man, being incarnate 
"of the Virgin.'** 

Early in the fourth century arose the celebra- 
ted Arius of Alexandria^ an eloquent and pop- 
ular ecclesiastick, who taught that Christ was 
the most exalted of all crea tures, but still a 
creature, and of course unworthy of Divine 
honours; that this exalted creature was united 
to a human body; that in the person thus con« 
stituted there was nothing more of human na- 
ture than the flesh; the Word or Logos being 
the soul which animated this body. These no- 
tions were no sooner divulged than they made 
considerable noise; and Arius^ being not only a 
man of art, acuteness, and eloquence, but also 
of exemplary morals, succeeded in obtaining 
many friends and advocates. A number of cler= 
gy men, and some of no small distinction, embra- 
oed and openly taught his heresy. In short, hte 



164 



LETTER V. 



adherents became so numerous and bold, that 
measures of a mere decisive character than usual 
were thought necessary by the friends of truth * 
Accordingly A. D. 325, the Council of Nice 
was assembled, by command of the Emperor, to 
consider and decide on the ease of Arius. This 
was the first General Council that ever 
convened in the christian church. Other Coun- 
cils, comprising the ministers of large sections 
of the church, had often assembled before, 
and some of them were truly respectable in 
point of numbers. But the Council of Nice was 
the first in which delegates from the whole 
christian church were summoned, by imperial 
authority, to meet on the business of the whole 
Church. In fact, it was only about that time 
that such a meausure had become practicable. 
For it was only in that very year that Constan- 
tine, the first Christian Emperor, became the 
sole head of the empire. 

When the Council came together, it was found 
extremely difficult to obtain from Arius any sat* 
isfactory explanation of his views. Like Paul 
of Samosata, he discovered a strong disposition 
to evade and equivocate, and actually haffleck 



LETTER V. 



165 



for some time, the attempts of the most ingen- 
ious and learned of the Orthodox, to specify and 
bring to light his errors. At length, by adopt- 
ing some expressions which were thought to be 
of sufficiently discriminating import, they suc- 
ceeded in detecting and exhibiting his opinions 
in their real deformity. These opinions were 
condemned as heretical, by an almost unanimous 
vote of the Council, and a creed drawn up and 
signed, in substance the same with that which 
we now commonly call the JVicene Creed. Out 
of more than six hundred members, of which it 
was composed, only twenty- two or twenty-three 
dissented from the final judgment, and of these 
dissentients, twenty at length yielded, and sub- 
scribed the Orthodox synodical creed. Arius 
and two of his adherents in the Synod, persis- 
ting in their refusal to subscribe, were not only 
condemned as hereticks, b.nt also deposed from 
the ministry, and excommunicated from the 
church. 

It may not be improper to mention that Ace- 
sius, a Novatian bishop, being present at the 
Council, was asked by the Emperor Constantine^ 
whether he assented to its judgment? He repli- 



LETTER V. 



ed — "The council has decreed nothing new. 
" So I have always understood the church to 
44 have received, even from the times of the 

44 Apostles. 5 '* 

The Creed, as drawn up and ratified by the 
Council of Nice, differed considerably from what 
is now commonly called the Nicene Creed; 
which was modified and made what it is, by 
several subsequent Councils. It originally stood 
thus — "We believe in one God, Almighty, ma- 
rker of all things, visible and invisible: and in 
"one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begot- 
44 ten of the Father, the only begotten, that is 
44 of the subtance of the Father, God of God, 
64 Light of Light, very God of very God, begot- 
44 ten not made, consubstantial with the Fath- 
C4 er; by whom all things both in heaven and 
44 earth were made. Who for us men, and our 
44 salvation, came down from heaven, and was 
44 incarnate, and made man, and suffered, and 
44 the third day rose again, and ascended into 
44 heaven, and shall come again to judge the 
° 4 quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. 
44 And the Catholick and Apostolick Church 

*Socrat. Hist. Lib. I. cap. 10. 



LETTER T. 



" anathematizes those who say, that there was a 
" time when the Son of God was not ; or that 
"He was not before He was born; or that He 
" was made out of nothing, or of another sub- 
"stance or essence; or that He was created 
"or mutable."* 

In estimating the degree of importance to be 
attached to this Creed, let it never be forgotten 
that we are by no means to consider it as ex- 
pressing the individual opinions of a few eccle- 
siasticks; but as the digested, solemn judgment 
of the whole Church, by its representatives, 
assembled for the express purpose of consider- 
ing and deciding the controversy to which it 
related. We have here, then, the creed of the 
WHdLE Christian World, on the point in 
question, professedly and formally stated, in a 
single document. And, when those who are ac- 
quainted with the history of the Nicence Coun- 
cil, remember how amply the subject was dis- 
cussed, and with what peculiar care and mature 
advisement the strong language of their creed 
was selected and adjusted, they cannot fail of 
seeing in it evidence amounting to demonstra 

* Socrat. Hist. Eccles. Lib L cap. 8, 



161 



LETTER V. 



tion, that the doctrines of the Divinity and 
Personality of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, 
and of the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, 
were universally deemed, at that time, as es- 
sential PARTS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH, 
g - 

Hitherto we have contemplated cases of de- 
parture from the Orthodox faith, with respect 
to the Trinity in general, or the person of Jesus 
Christ in particular. But it appears that pious 
believers, from the earliest times to the present, 
were no less jealous of any deviation from the 
truth with respect to the Personality and Di- 
vinity of the Holy Spirit. A few years after 
the Arian heresy had been condemned by the 
Council of Nice, Macedonius, bishop of Con a 
stantinople, denied the Personality of the Holy 
Ghost; maintaining that what was called by this 
name in scripture, was only a Divine energy 
diffused throughout the universe, and nothing 
properly distinct from the Father and the Son. 
Macedonius was condemned and deposed as a 
he re tick, by a Council at Constantinople, A. D. 
360; and his opinions still more solemnly 
examined, and again condemned, by the second 
general Council, convened at Constantinople, by 



LETTER Y> 



162 



order of Theodosius, A. D. 381. Here is anoth 
er instance in which we see, not merely a distin- 
guished individual, but the whole Christian 
Church, deliberating on a new form of heresy, 
and solemnly deciding, that the Divinity and 
Personality of the Holy Spirit, and, by conse- 
quence, the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead^ 
were to be considered as fundamental articles of 
Christian truth. 

It would be an easy matter to extend this list 
of heresies to a much greater length, if the limits 
which I have prescribed to myself did not for- 
bid it. I might mention the Carpocraiions, the 
Baslideans. and the Moniamsis, the followers 
of HermogeneS) of Photinus, of Apollinaris, and 
of many more; all of whom were unseund with 
respect to the Person of Christ; and all of whom 
were condemned as corrupters of the faith, and 
excluded from the community of Christians* 
Indeed, I can candidly assure you, that, after 
devoting much of my life to reading of this sort 9 
I cannot recollect a single instance in all 
antiquity, in which any individual, or body of 
individuals, who were known to deny the Trini* 
ty of Persons ia the Godhead, the true and 

15 



170 



LETTER Vr 



proper Divinity of the Saviour, or the Person- 
ality and Divinity of the Holy Spirit, were 
regarded as Christians, or were suffered to re- 
main in the communion of the Church* 

When we take a retrospect of these details^ 
the result, I should think, cannot fail of being as 
conclusive as it is striking. Had the scriptural 
doctrine concerning the personal glory of Christ, 
been asserted, ever so pointedly, by a single 
early writer only; or had merely a single form 
of heresy been condemned by the assembled 
church; ^^j^ enemies of the truth might, per= 
haps ? ali^ge^ some plausible ground for doubt 
£m so important a subject. But, as if to pre- 
clude the possibility of doubt in any candid 
mind, almost every form of heresy now known, 
;.T,ade its appearance within the first four cen- 
turies, and was, by name, denounced as a depar- 
ture from the true faith, and its advocates put 
under the ban of the church. Those who con- 
sidered tli£ Saviour as a mere man; those who 
regarded him as the jir^and most excised of all 
creatures; those who hefe to a mer£ nominal^ 
but denied a real Trinity, that is* who held to s 
Trinitv of names ^ but not of versons: and those 



LETTER V. 1U 

who rejected the Divinity and Personality of 
the Holy Spirit; in short the Paulians— the 
Avians— the Semi-Arians— the Sabellians—the 
Apollinarians, and the Macedonians, were each 
pronounced, in their turn, by the universal 
church, to be corrupters of the truth, and were 
publickly treated as such. Here is no possibil- 
ty of mistake; no ground for doubt. We are 
presented with an assemblage of decisions, which 
iiustrate, support, and confirm each other; 
which form a perfect system; and which speak 
the most unequivocal language. Either the 
whole Church, from the time of the Apostles, 
to the fourth century, had entirely lost sight of 
the truth, and become the unanimous advocates 
of error, on the most fundamental of all doc- 
trines; or the Orthodox opinions concerning 
the Person of the Saviour, and the Trinity nf^ 
the Godhead, were, from the beginning, the 
genuine faith of Christians. 

There is a further fact worthy of notice. It k 
the fact, that such hereticks were not only exclu- 
ded from the catholick or general Church; but 
their right to the name of Christian was sol« 
6mnly and formally denied. This was the case 



LETTER V. 



generally, and is particularly mentioned, by the 
-;arly writers, with respect to those who avowed 
heretical opinions concerning the Trinity, or 
concerning the Person of Jesus Christ, or the 
Holy Spirit, And, accordingly, all baptisms 
performed by such hereticks, were considered as 
null and void, and when those who had receiv- 
ed baptism from them, were disposed to return 
into the bosom of the church, they were always 
re-baptized, or, to speak with strict propriety^ 
baptized* by thg Orthodox miniiiirs whd rseiiv* 
ved th|Jpi 1 might proiUm & number of wit* 
mm% who abundantly tmtiff to tlnm fad§. 
Thoie who bavf any eoniiderabte ksowkdg© of 
the history of the early church, know that Cyp* 
rian % Tertullian, Lactanthis, Jerome, Augustine % 
and others, speak of them as established eccle- 
giastical practices, 

I have hitherto produced the testimony of the 
early Christians themselves, as to the doctrines 
which were taught, and as to the point of light 
in which departures from those doctrines, were 
considered by the body of the faithful. But it 
is quite as easy to go a step further, and to shew, 
that the Pagans understood the Christians ta 
hold and teach as h&s been stated. 



LETTER V. 



173 



Pliny certainly understood that the primitive 
christians considered and worshipped Christ as 
a Divine Being. Having occasion, as pro-con- 
sul of Bithynia and Pontus, to transmit to the 
Emperor Trajan an account of the principles 
and conduct of some christians, who had been 
brought before him as a magistrate, he expresses 
himself concerning them in this language; 
" they affirmed that this was the whole amount 
"of their crime or error, that they were wont, on 
u a certain day, to assemble before it was light s 
* ; and to sing a hymn to Christ as God."* 
The very fact 'of singing hymns to Christ, was 
enough to determine the point of light in which 
they viewed his Person. It was a solemn act of 
worship, which, upon the principles continually 
avowed by ail christians, could have been offer- 
ed only to Jehovah. But we are not left to ar- 
gue from mere inference. Pliny tells us expli- 
citly that the christians avowed that it was to 
Christ as God that they sung praises. 

Hierocles, president of Bithynia, and after- 
ward governor of Alexandria, in both which 
offices he manifested great zeal against christi- 



* Plin. EpisU Lib. 10. Ep. 07. 93, 
15* 



174 



LETTER V. 



anify, in his abridgment of the life of ApollonU 
us Tyanceus, by Philostratus^ undertakes to coni- 
pare the wisdom and dignity of the heathen, 
with the foliy and superstition of Christians, 
" We, indeed," says he, "do not account the 
6 * person (Apollonius) who has performed such 
"actions, God, but a man favoured of the Gods, 
" But they, because of a few miracles, pro- 
- 4 claim Jesus to be God."'* 

Celsus, the Epicurian philosopher, who lived 
a little before Origen^ and who wrote with great 
bitterness against Christianity, beyond all doubt 
considered the Christians as believing in the 
Divinity of Christ. He says, expressly, that 
" Jesus was owned by Christians to be the Son 
"ofGod."| He says, moreover, that "Jesus, 
"elated with his great powers, declared him- 
li self to be God."J And again, Origen, in 
answering Celsus 3 brings us acquainted with a 
similar charge. "He (Celsus) objects to us," 
says Origen, "I know not how often, that we 
"believe Jesus, though possessed of a mortal 
" body, to be God, and that we seem to be 
u serious in this."§ These charges Origen 

* See Burgh's Inquiry, p. 403, f Origen. contra Ceh 
trjjm* L. I. p 2i, % Ibid. p. 22, \ Ibid. Lib, III. p, 331. 



*4 



LETTER V. 



175 



does not deny ; but, on the contrary, avows that 
Christians did so esteem and honour the Son 
of God. 

Lucian, in one of his Dialogues, takes notice 
of the christian worship,. Personating a chris- 
tian instructing a catechumen, he makes the 
catechumen ask this question, u By whom shall 
u l swear? 7 ' The christian instructor replies, 
"By the God that reigns on high; the great, 
u immortal, heavenly God, and the Son of the 
" Father, and the Spirit proceeding from the 
•* Father, One in Three and Three in One."* 
This Lucian had evidently learned from the 
christian doctrine of the Trinity. He else- 
where directly charges the christians with 
61 worshipping their crucified imposter," as he 
blasphemously styles our blessed Lord. 

But there is no need of adducing further testi- 
mony to establish the fact, that the primitive 
Christians were understood by their Pagan 
neighbours to consider and worship Christ ag 
God. There is nothing in early history more 
indubitable. A number of the Fathers express 

* Ltjcian, Philopai* 



LETTER V. 



ly state the fact, and plead guilty to the charge • 
but declare, that the sole ground of their wor- 
shipping Christ is, that they consider him as 
truly God; for that they abhor the thought of 
giving divine honours and worship to a creature. 

Tf I do not mistake, Unitarians acknowledge, 
without hesitation, that, afier the council of 
JVTce, what are called the Orthodox doctrines, 
respecting the Trinity, and the Person of Christ, 
were the prevailing doctrines of the church; 
and that those who rejected them were cast out 
as hereticks; their ordinances pronounced in- 
valid; and their congregations denied the name 
of Christian Churches. Further than this, 
then, there is no need of pursuing the train of 
testimony. From the council of JVice In the 
fourth century, till the reformation in the six- 
teenth, no one disputes that the doctrines of 
three Persons in the Godhead, and, of course, 
of the Divinity of the Saviour, were universally 
maintained, by those who were considered as 
correct believers, and the rejection of them re- 
garded as an essential departure from the truth. 
But it ought not to be forgotten, that, from the 
rise of the Papal Beast until that of the Pro- 



LETTER V. 



177 



testasgf Reformers, there was a constant success 
sion of Witnesses for the truth, who separated 
themselves from the Man of sin; refused to 
sanction his corruptions; formed a distinct com- 
munion; and maintained a constant testimony 
in favour of the simplicity of the gospel, It 
may be worth while to inquire, what these wit- 
nesses held, with regard to the principle points 
in controversy between the Orthodox and Unita- 
rians* And, if I am hot deceived^ it will be 
(psy to itoif that thiy all concurred with the 
tbrmir. 

The first that 1 shall merit ton in thii list are 
the Paulcians, who arose in the seventh centu- 
ry, in Ada Minor, and may be considered as 
forming the most conspicuous and important 
portion of the true Church, in opposition to the 
Papacy, for 150 or 200 years. They appear 
to have received their name from their enemies^ 
on account of their great attachment to the 
Epistles of Paul the Apostle, While they re- 
jected all the principal corruptions of the cath- 
olick Church; such as the use of Images, the 
worship of the Virgin Mary, &c* which had 
even then begun to gain currency; and while 



178 



LETTER V, 



they acknowledged but two Sacraments, and 
appear to have been, in the main, scriptural in 
their views and use of them; — they concurred 
with the general Church in maintaining the 
doctrines of the Trinity, and of the Divinity 
and Atonement of Jesus Christ, and con- 
stantly represented them as being the founda- 
tion of christian hope.* 

The very same statement may be made con- 
cerning Claudius of Turin, and his followers, 
in the ninth century. While they separated 
themselves from the corrupt nominal christians 
around them, and publickly renounced all the 
leading errors of Popery, they maintained with 
zeal the Divinity and Atonement of the Sa- 
viour, as the life and glory of the Gospel 
system. 

To these succeeded the Waldenses and AIM- 
genses; or rather there is reason to believe, that 
the disciples of Claudius of Turin, settling in 
the vallies of Piedmont, were the parents of 

* Our information concerning the Paulcians is far from 
being ample. The excellent Mr. Milner's view of them is 
prooably correct. With him Mr. Gibbon, as to all the 
points which are important in this controversy, coincides* 
Decline and Fmll % &c. chapter 54* 



LETTER V. 



IT3 



both the Albigenses and Waldenses, who receiv- 
ed their names from the places of their resi- 
dence. That these venerable Witnesses for the 
truth, maintained, unanimously, and with zeal ? 
the doctrine of the Trinity, and of the Divinity 
of Christ, in correspondence with the opinions 
of those who are now called the Orthodox, is 
one of the most indubitable facts in all ecclesias- 
tical history. Dr. Priestly, indeed, while he 
acknowledges that the Waldenses were Trini- 
tarians, tells us that the first traces of the 
revival of the Unitarian doctrine were to be 
found among the Albigenses. Of these "traces," 
I have never been able to meet with the small= 
est appearance, that deserved to be considered 
?*& even plausible. In fact, the Waldenses 
and Albigenses were undoubtedly the same peo- 
ple, inhabiting different countries, and deriving^ 
from that circumstance, different names. In the 
Papal edicts against the Albigenses, they are 
expressly styled Waldenses, and condemned as 
such. They were persecuted as professing the 
faith of the Waldenses; and they uniformly ac- 
cepted the title when it was given them, and 
thought themselves honoured by it. This being 
#e ? it is not easy to see how the Albigensts co&lfi 



LETTFR T. 



be Unitarians, while the Waldenses were dec! 
sively Orthodox. But we have better evidence 
than that of the mere inferential kind. John 
Paul Perrin, one of the pastors v of the Walden- 
sian churches, gives several confessions of faith, 
and other authentick documents, by which he 
makes it appear that the Waldenses and Albigen- 
ses were entirely agreed in doctrine; and that 
the latter, as well as the former, maintained, in 
the most pointed manner that can well be ima- 
gined, a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, 
and the true and proper Divinity of the Saviour. 
Under the head of the "Old Albigenses^ as 
well as the Waldenses, he gives the following 
articles as held by them, and as "handed down 
"from father to son for several hundred years" 
prior to the date of these Confessions. 

Concerning the Trinity, and the Person of the 
blessed Redeemer, they speak in the following 
language: "We do believe that there is one 
"God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
"Ghost." 

In an "Ancient Catechism," for the instruc D 
tion of their youth, the following questions and 



LETTER V. 



answers are found: "Question" "Dost thou 
" 4 believe in the Holy Ghost. 5 ' "Answer. Yes. 
*'! do believe. For the Holy Ghost proceeds 
" from the Father and the Son, and is one Per- 
"son of the Trinity; and^ according to the 
" Divinity, is equal to the Father and the Son." 

" Question. Thou believest' God the Father,, 
"and God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost: 
"thou hast, therefore, three Gods." 

"Answer. I have not three; for although 
fe; there are three Persons, yet, notwithstand- 
ing, there is but one Essence." 

In a "Brief Exposition of the Apostle 5 s 
" creed," in early use among that people, there 
is the following passage: 

"We believe in God the Father, Almightv a 
^ maker of heaven and earth, which God is one 
"Trinity; as it is written 1 John v. 7. There 
" are three that bear record in heaven, the Fa* 
46 ther, the Word, and the Holy Ghost) and 
; * these three are one." 



16 



182 



Letter v. 



Nor ought it ever to be forgotten, that while 
these excellent Witnesses for Christ, in a dark 
world, maintained the doctrine of three Persons 
in the Godhead, and the Divinity of the Son of 
God, they also maintained in their purity all 
those precious doctrines which have been regard- 
ed by the true Church, in all ages, as funda~ 
mental such as the original corruptions of our 
nature — the atonement of the Saviour — justifica- 
tion by his righteousness alone — and the neces- 
sity of regeneration and sanctification by his 
Holy Spirit. Nay, not only did this system 
distinguish those humble followers of the Re- 
deemer; but I am persuaded it would be per- 
fectly easy to demonstrate, that, in proportion as 
simple, humble piety, has been manifested in 
any portion or period of the church, just in the 
same proportion have those who displayed it, 
been patrons of the same humiliating and puri- 
fying doctrines. 

When, after the Waldenses, John Wickliffe, 
of Great-Britain* and John Hussj and Jerome, of 
Bohemia, appeared as witnesses of the truth, 
the Divinity of Christ, and his atoning sacri- 
fice for sin, were radical principles of their sys- 



LETTER V, 



tern. Nay, it is not going too far to say, that 
their testimony in behalf of the truth, and their 
opposition to the corrupt church of Rome, were 
in no respects more conspicuous, or more pre- 
cious, than in teaching men to transfer thek 
confidence for acceptance with God, and eternal 
life, from the miserable superstitious dreams of 
human merit, to the atoning blood, the perfect 
righteousness* and the prevalent intercession of 
an Almighty Saviour, This was, in fact, the 
essence of what they did. Their attacks on 
particular superstitions were the body and the 
members; while that to which I have just allu- 
ded, was the vital principle of that precious 
cause to which they devoted their lives* 

When we come down to the Reformation by 
Luther, and his ever-to-be venerated coadju- 
tors, the same fact appears, in a still more lumin- 
ous and interesting view. Still Jehovah in a 
Trinity of Persons, and the atoning sacrifice of 
Him who was very God and very man, that who- 
soever believeth in Him might not perish, but 
have everlasting life, are not only found to make 
a part of the system of those blessed men: but 
io form the joundation, nay, the Alpha and 



LETTER V* 

be Omega, the beginning and the enb, the 
life and the glory of their system. Yes 9 
svery one knows, that the friends of the Refor- 
mation, whether led, under God, by Zuingle, in 
Szvitzerland, by Lather, in Germany, by Calvin, 
In Geneva and France, by Cranmer, in Eng- 
land, hy Knox, in Scotland, or by other illustri- 
ous servants of Christ, in other parts of Eu- 
rope, were all agreed in this general sys„ 
TEMe I defy any one to produce me a single 
individual, during that eventful period, who 
materially departed from any of the doctrines 
embraced in this system, without being, as soon 
as known, stigmatized as a heretick, and cas* 

out of the Church. 

Accordingly, (for nothing is so decisive on a 
subject like this as matter of fact) when the dif- 
ferent Protestant Churches, in the sixteenth 
century, undertook to frame and publish their 
ecclesiastical Formulas, and Creeds, they all? 
without a single exception, distinctly re- 
cognized, in those creeds, the unity of God; the 
Trinity of Persons in the Godhead; the eternal 
Generation and Divinity of the Son; the union 
of his Divine and human natures in one Per- 



LETTER V. 



186 



son, and the distinct Personality and Divinity 
of the Holy Spirit, The most cursory glance 
at the Confessions of Faith of the Churches of 
England, Scotland, France, Holland, Geneva* 
Switzerland, Germany, Bohemia, Poland, not 
to mention several others, will convince any one, 
not only that the articles of doctrine above 
mentioned, were all universally received in 
those churches; but also, that, from the careful 
and pointed manner in which they are stated, 
they were regarded as fundamental articles of 
the christian system. Whence this remarkable 
harmony? How are we to account for it, that, 
amidst so much diversity of situation and habit ? 
and while they discovered so much readiness 
to throw off the superstitions of the Church 
of Rome, they should still unanimously con- 
cur in maintaining a set of doctrines, which, if 
Unitarians be correct, are entirely and grossly 
idolatrous? 

I know it has been said by Unitarians, that 
the Reformers found the doctrines of the Trini- 
ty, and the Deity and atonement of Christ, 
already consecrated by the Formulas and Cate- 
chisms of the Romish Church; ttpt theif 



'186 



LETTER V. 



own prejudices were in favour of them; and 
that they had neither sufficient light, nor suffi- 
cient boldness to reject them, while they cast 
off the trammels of some more prominent and 
appalling corruptions. This plea is at once 
weak and erroneous. When the Reformers had 
deliberately dared to draw down upon them- 
selves the hottest vengeance of the Papacy, by 
openly teaching that the Bishop of Rome was 
Anti-Christ, and that the Redeemer alone 
was the Head of the church; when they had 
ventured, without scruple, to denounce as un- 
scriptural abominations, Purgatory, Transub- 
stantiation, Prayers for the dead, Image wor- 
ship, the worship of the Virgin Mary, Indul- 
gences, withholding the Scriptures, and the 
cup in the Eucharist, from the common people^ 
and all that enormous system of human merit^ 
by which the Pope and his emissaries, had so 
long contrived to fill their own coffers, and to 
enslave the minds of men: — I say, when they 
dared openly to attack all these as unscriptural 
abominations— is it supposeable that they woulcf 
Se very timed or scrupulous about rejecting a 
^octrine, which was far less connected with the 
Interests or the feelings of any portion of the 



LETTER V. 



187 



community, in or out of power? Now, that, in 
these circumstances, when they discovered so 
little backwardness to reject whatever the Bi? 
ble did not appear to them -to sanction; and 
when they actually differed among themselves, 
respecting church government, respecting the 
Saviour's presence in the Eucharist, respecting 
the propriety of placing pictures and images 
in churches, and some other smaller points: — > 
that they should all concur, amidst their di- 
versities of residence, and light, and early hab- 
it, in maintaining the doctrines alluded to, and 
not merely maintaining them, but in laying the 
utmost stress upon them, as essential to 
the Gospel; is surely conclusive proof that 
they retained these dcctrines, not because the 
Church had long believed them; but because 
they were persuaded that they found them in 
the Word of God. 

But it is an utter misrepsentation to say, 
that the venerable Reformers merely retained 
the doctrines alluded to, as they found them in 
the Romish Church. I know that some modern 
writers are fond of representing the Reforma- 
tion, as a mere successful effort, on the part of 



LETTER V. 



188 



fi few discerning and good men, to shake off the 
tyranny of the Pope, and an oppressive burden 
of Papal rites and superstitions. But this view 
©f the subject is altogether inadequate, and even 
false. That which the Reformers were called 
upon, and were employed as instruments, by a 
sovereign God, to accomplish, was, not merely 
to demolish a fabrick of ecclesiastical despot- 
ism; not merely to take away a mass of cere- 
monial corruptions; but it was to restore 
Christ to that throne im his church, 
which had been for ages filled by human idols. 
It is true, the doctrines of a Trinity of Persons 
in the Godhead, and of the Deity of Jesus 
Christ, had been long nominally maintained in 
the Church of Rome; but they were maintain- 
ed in name only. While the votaries of that 
wretched system said much, and wrote much, 
concerning the Divinity of Christ, and the 
atonement of Christ, they, in fact, made little 
of either. Canonized saints, relicks, indul- 
gences, and an impious system of human mer- 
it, were substituted in the place of that blood 
which cleanseth from all sin. To bring back 
the doctrine of Christ crucified, from 
its long banishment, and its miserable perver- 



LETTER V. 



139 



aions, may be said, without hesitation, to have 
been the grand object of the Reformers; 
and the object in which they were all united. 
Other things were evidently regarded as im- 
portant, just in proportion to the degree in 
which they were subservient to this, their first 
and highest turpose. The doctrines espous- 
ed by the Orthodox, then, in opposition to Uni- 
tarians, may, with just as much propriety and 
emphasis, be styled the doctrines of the 
Reformation, as any opposition to Papal des- 
potism, or Papal superstitions, may be called the 
work of the Reformation; and to insinuate 
the contrary is to betrav either an ignorance or 

a prejudice truly extraordinary* 

In the review of all this, I entreat you, my 
christian Brethren, to lay your hands on your 
hearts, and then say, whether those doctrines 
which, besides their plain scriptural warrant, 
have been embraced, with affectionate attach- 
ment, by the pious in all ages; which were 
the doctrines of all the early Fathers, who 
say any thing on the subject; which no indi- 
vidual, from the time of the Apostles, to the 
time of Luther* is known to have openly rejec- 



LETTER V. 



ted, without being cast out of the Churchy 
which were the doctrines of the Paulcians, the 
Wuldenses, the Albigenses, the followers of Wick™ 
liffe, the Bohemia Brethren, and all the Wit- 
nesses for the truth, during the dark ages; 
and finally, which all the Reformers from 
Popery concurred in maintaining, as the very 
essence of the Gospel — I repeat it— Lay 
your hands on your hearts and say, whether 
these doctrines can be any other than the faith 
once delivered to the saints, and for which all 
christians are commanded "earnestly to co&- 

-TEND?" 



LETTT.R VI 



Unitarians reject the inspiration of the Scriptures-* 
Difference between them and the Orthodox with res- 
pect to the proper office of Reason in examining Reve- 
lation — Specimens of Unitarian exposition — Conse- 
quences of this mode of expounding the word of 
God. 

Christian Brethren, 

As the Unitarians, in their controversies with 
the Orthodox, constantly appeal to the Scrip- 
tures, and profess to cherish a very profound 
respect for them, it has probably appeared to 
many that they view the inspired volume in 
the same light with the Orthodox. They fre- 
quently speak of the reverence and diligence 
with which they and their friends study it. 
They insist upon referring every question to it 
as a standard. They often quote, with much 
emphasis, the celebrated saying of Chilling- 
ivorth, "The Bible, the Bible is the Relj- 



LETTER VL 



" gion of Protestants." They object to 
Creeds and Confessions, lest they should come 
into competition with the Scriptures as a rule of 
faith. They frequently charge the advocates of 
evangelical truth with being backward to ap- 
peal to this standard, and with being governed 
by prejudice, or love of system, or feelings 
rather than by the Word of God. In short, you 
would sometimes be led, by their language, to 
suppose, that none who bear the christian name, 
either feel so much reverence for the sacred 
Scriptures, as Unitarians, or lay so much stress 
on their authority, as an ultimate resort in con- 
troversy. 

But this is a mere illusion: and a very small 
acquaintance with their writers and preachers 
will be quite sufficient to dissipate it. I assert- 
ed, in the first Letter, that Unitarians common- 
ly deny the inspiration of the Scriptures, and 
produced some testimony in support of my as- 
sertion; but the subject is worthy of more par- 
ticular notice; In my view, the manner in which 
they consider and treat the Scriptures, is, next 
to their rejection of the Redeemer's true glory ? 
one of the most conclusive evidences of the vital 



LETTER VL 



191 



r©tten»ess of their system. Some Unitarians^ 
indeed, profess, in words, to believe in the inspi- 
ration of the Word of God; but even they, when 
they come to explain themselves, plainly shew 
that it is not the reality, but the name only, of 
inspiration which they admit. They set out 
with a principle concerning the inspired vol- 
ume, which almost entirely nullifies it, at once* 
as a rule of faith. According to them, Reason^ 
after all, is the only safe and adequate guide. 
They assume it to be the prerogative of reason 
to sit in judgment upon Revelation, and to 
modify, or expunge from it, every thing which 
that reason cannot comprehend, or does not ap- 
prove. Of course, whenever they meet with a 
passage which appears hostile to their general 
views, it gives them no serious difficulty. They 
iind an easy way, either to silence it, or to make 
It speak agreeably to their wishes. 

It is true, the Orthodox also profess to employ 
reason in their inquiries respecting Revelation; 
but the essential difference between them and 
Unitarians, as to this point, lies here. The Or- 
thodox maintain, that our own reason is alto- 
gether insufficient to guide us in spiritual things; 



194 



LETTER VL 



that we stand in need of a revelation from 
heaven, to inform us concerning the Divine 
character, concerning our own condition, and 
the means of obtaining eternal happiness; and 
that such a revelation has actually beer given 
to us, to enlighten our darkness, and bring; us 
acquainted with what we otherwise could not 
have known. They suppose, therefore, that 
since it is the weakness and utter insufficiency 
of our reason, that renders a revelation neces- 
sary, nothing can be more presumptuous, or 
indeed more irrational, than to undertake to 

judge WHAT OUGHT TO EE REVEALED. They 

conclude, of course, that the only legitimate 
province of season, in examining revelation, 
embraces two points of inquiry, viz. fast — Is 
*here evidence that a revelation has been giv= 
en? And secondly — What does that revelation, 
la fact, contain? In other words, have we satis- 
factory proof that God has spoken? and, if so, 
what has He said? Having ascertained thus 
much, the Orthodox suppose that the proper 
office of reason there ends. For if God have 
spoken, we have nothing to do but humbly to re„ 
ceive what He has revealed; to submit ourselves 
without reserve to his teaching. Whatever is 



LETTER VI. 



193 



clearly and indisputably taught in Scripture, 
they consider themselves as bound implicitly to 
believe, without another question* To under- 
take to judge whether that which we find in a 
revelation confessed to be from God, is reason- 
able and credible, or not, is really neither more 
nor less than undertaking to judge what Gob 
ought To reveal; while the facts, that we 
need, and have received a revelation, pre-sup* 
pose, from the very-nature of the case, that we 
are not capable of judging, h not such an as* 
sumption as absurd as it is impious! 1$ it not, in 
sfact, as Lord Bacon long ago observed, treating 
God just as we should treat a suspected wit- 
ness, that is, measuring his title to our cre- 
dence, not by his personal character 7 but by the 
probability of his testimony? Is it not prac- 
tically saying, that we cannot, and will not. rely 
on the veracity of God: that we cannot, and 
will not, trust Him further than we can see; in 
one word, that we will give credit to the Mat- 
ter, but not to the Author of Revelation? Is 
this receiving the kingdom of God as a little 
child, without which, we are told, that no one 
can enter therein 7 



196 



LETTER Vi\ 



But Unitarians view this subject in a very 
different light. After having applied their rea* 
ion to the evidences of revelation, and ascer- 
tained that it is from God; they consider them- 
selves as at perfect liberty to go further, and to 
apply it to the ailed ged facts and doctrines of 
revelation; to inquire whether these facts and 
doctrines are reasonable and credible in them- 
selves; that is. whether they are such as it be- 
comes God to reveal; and if they judge 
them not to be such, to reject thim# In plaia 
language, they consider it aa tha province of 
reason not only to decide whether tha Bible is 
God's word or not; but also whether the con* 
tents of the Bible are reasonable and worthy of 
God, or otherwise. Every thing found in it 
that appears agreeable to their notions of rea- 
son, they receive as credible. That which they 
cannot reconcile with reason, or which their 
reason cannot comprehend, they reject as false; 
insisting either, that the passage which contains 
it is spurious, and ought to be expunged; or, 
that it is impossible it should mean what the Or- 
thodox suppose it to mean; or, if it plainly 
mean that, and cannot be construed to mean any 
thing else, that the sacred writer has blunder* 



LETTER VL 



19? 



ED, or been led by some popular prejudice to 
express himself in an unwarrantable man- 
ner! 

Nay, some Unitarians of great name and in- 
fluence have gone so far as to maintain^ without 
ceremony, that certain doctrines are so manifest^ 
Jy irrational and incredible, that they ought not 
to be received, even if the Scriptures did ap- 
pear ever so explicitly and decisively to teach 
them. The spirit of their argument is precise- 
ly the same with that of the celebrated infidel 5 
Mr. Hume, against Miracles. It is this: "The 
11 doctrines in question,' 5 say they, "are so ab- 
"surd and incredible, that the presumption 
H against them is stronger than any evidence 
*Mn their favour possibly can be. In other 
14 words, these doctrines are so perfectly revolt- 
u ing to the human mind, that no testimony can 
4 be conceived strong enough to command our 
'belief of them; because no testimony in their 
favour, can be so strong, as that which their 

• manifest absurdity and impossibility presents* 
K against them. There is, from the very nature 
>; of things, a presumption, against their truth, 

* irhieh no evidence, however clear, can 

17* 



198 



LETTER VI. 



" overcome." — Unitarians have applied this ar- 
gument to the doctrines of the Trinity, the In- 
carnation and Atonement of the Son of God T 
and the endless duration of future punishment* 
They utterly deny, indeed, that these doctrines 
are found in Scripture: but they do not hesi- 
tate to say, that if they were found there, they 
would not believe them, but would rather have 
recourse to almost any assignable supposition, 
than sustain the testimony in their favour. They 
would say, "These doctrines cannot be true. 
"It is impossible that we should believe, or 
" that we should be required to believe, such 
"gross absurdities. There must be some mis- 
M take about the matter. The passsage in ques- 
" tion has been dishonestly inserted by some 
"interested transcriber; or it has been unde- 
signedly introduced by accident or careless- 
ness; or, the sacred writer, if he really wrote 
"thus, reasoned inconclusively, or thought pro. 
"per to countenance, out of respect to popular 
"delusion, what he knew to be false; at any 
^ rate we are resolveb not to receive such 
41 doctrines as coming from God, whatever 

M^Y BE Tfil EVIDENCE WITH WHIC£ TH££ 
ARE ATTENDED* * 



LETTER Vi. 



199 



It is, indeed, readily acknowledged, that if 
~**Xre were to find in Scripture propositions plainly 
and undeniably contradictory to reason, we 
could not receive them. If, for example, we 
were to find there the assertion, that something 
is and is not, at the same time; that God is 
one and three in the same sense; or that two 
beings, or quantities, are equal to each other, 
and unequal, at the same time, and in the same 
•respect; we might venture to say, without hesi- 
tation, it is incredible that such propositions 
should be true. No testimony whatever can es- 
tablish that which is, in its own nature, self- 
evidently, impossible and absurd. But is any 
thing maintained by the Orthodox of this char- 
acter? Do they believe that God is one and 
three in the same sense? Do they not, with one 
voice, as was observed in a former Letter, sol- 
emnly declare the contrary? Where 5 then, is 
the contradiction? There is manifestly, nay, I 
will venture to say, there is self evidently, 
none; any more than there is in saying that 
man is mortal and immortal at the same time^ 
when we know that both are true, though of dif- 
ferent parts of his constitution. I repeat, then ? 
a number of the doctrines of revelation ar£ 



LETTER VI. 



above our portion of reason; but none of them 
contrary to it. A man, indeed, may say, u It is 
"contrary to my reason, that any being should 
" be every where equally present at the same 
"time; or that any being should create worlds 
"out of nothing:" Or, a malefactor, at the bar 
of justice, when the judge addresses him on the 
importance of supporting the authoriey of the 
laws, and assures him of the necessity, and even 
benevolence, of awarding exemplary punishment 
to transgressors; may declare, and perhaps with 
truth, that such principles appear to him in the 
highest degree revolting and unreasonable. I say, 
some persons may object and argue thus; nay, 
they have done so. But when they do it, they 
must be content to be thought very foolish and 
absurd by all rational men. Every one will say, 
they are neither competent nor impartial judges* 
Now, among all the truths of revelation, as held 
by the enlightened and sober among the Ortho- 
dox, there is nothing in any other sense, or in 
any greater degree, opposed to reason, than 
many of the acknowledged perfections of God 
are opposed to it. And of them we can only 
say, not that they are really opposed to it, but 
that they are above it, We can only say, m 



LETTER VI. 



2M 



the Bible says, when speaking of those perfec- 
tions, Such knowledge is toe wonderful for usj 
it is high , we cannot attain unto it. 

That, in the foregoing remarks, I have done 
no injustice to Unitarians, will, I presume, be 
made perfectly manifest by the following quota- 
tions from some of their most distinguished wri- 
ters. Indeed, when the doctrine of the plenary 
inspiration; of thi scriptures is once abandoned, 
mi eviry mm fedi himself at liberty to reject 
whuiavir hi fintji in the Bibl§ ? which npptar^ 
unre monabli to hi§ own mind* there i§ no longer 
my uniform standard, and we ought not to won- 
der at any licentiousness of interpretation or 
rejection that can afterward occur. 

Dr. Priestly, while inculcating great respect 
for the Scriptures, expresses himself thus— 
44 Not that I consider the books of scripture as 
"inspired, and, on that account, entitled to this 
44 high degree of respect; but as authentick 
44 records of the dispensations of God to man- 
44 kind, with every particular of which we can- 
44 not be too well acquainted. 55 In another place, 
in the same work, he says— "If you wish to 



sou 



LETTER VI. 



^know what, in my opinion, a christian is 
" bound to believe with respect to the scrip- 
- ; tures, I answer, that the books which are 
" u-niversally received as authentick, are to be 
" considered as faithful records of past transac- 
" tions. No christian is answerable for more 
"than this. The writers of the books of scrip* 
"ture were men, and, therefore, fallible; but 
4i all that toe have to do with them, is in the 
" character of historians and miimm of what 
14 they heard and saw. Of course, their credi- 
" bility is to be estimated, like that of other 
" historians, viz, from the circumstances in 
M which they w r rote, and the biases to which 
u they might be subject. Like all other histo 
"rians, they were liable to mistakes, with 
" respect to things of small moment, because 
" they might not give sufficient attention to 
"them; and with respect to their reasoning. 
"we are fully at liberty to judge of it, as well 
"as that of other men, by a due consideration 
u of the propositions they advance, and the ar- 
" guments they alledge."* The same writer 
also says elsewhere, 4 1 think I have shewn 

* Letters to a Philosophical Unbeliever— Part II. Preface^ 
p. 13. again Letter ¥• 



LETTER VI. 



203 



" that the apostle Paul often reasons incon. 
^clusively; and therefore that he wrote as 
" any other person of his turn of mind and 
^thinking, and in his situation, would have 

" WRITTEN, WITHOUT ANY PARTICULAR INSPI- 
RATION."* And again, "I have frequently 
" declared myself not to be a believer in the 
" inspiration of the Evangelists and Apos- 
" tles as writers*"! He also, on a variety 
of occasions, charges the sacred writers with 
giving "lame accounts," "inconclusive reason- 
"ings," and "improper quotations,"! Mr* 
Evanson, another distinguished English Unita- 
rian, says, without ceremony, "The Evangelic- 
al histories contain gross and !rrec©ncile- 
"able contradictions. "§ 

Mr. Belsham says, that in the Gospel of John 
our Saviour sometimes uses metaphors "of the 
"most obscure aud offensive kind; that 
Paul, in his Epistles, introduces "many harsh 
" and uncommon figures;" that the author of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews indulges himself in an 
ingenious, but forced and farciful analogy, 

* History of the Corruptions of Christianity. Vol. II. p. 370, 
f Letters to Dr. Rorsley. part I. p. 132. 
% Letters to Mr. Burn— Letter § Dissonance, p. 1 > 



29i 



LETTER VL 



between the Mosaic institutions and the Chris 
tian dispensation; that Jesus Christ was born 
fifteen years before the death of Augustus, and 
at least two years after the death of Herod; 
"a fact which completely falsifies the 
"whole narrative contained in the prelimi- 
nary chapters of Matthew and Luke;" that 
to argue the doctrine of the Divinity af Christ 
or even his pre-existenee and superior nature* 
from the strong and "hyperbolical" expres- 
sions used by the Evangelist John, "unsuppor- 
" ted by any other sacred writers," is drawing 
a grand conclusion from very "precarious" 
premises.* Damm, a German Unitarian, in 
the same strain, says, that u the writings of Mo- 
M ses were inspired, in so far as they instruct us 
lc concerning God, and lead us to God. He could 
M know the age of the world no better than 
u we do. The history of the fall is a fable; 
"and though there is much truth in Moses 1 * 
"history, the dress is poetick. In Joshua $ 
" the circumstances of the conquest of Canaan, 
"are fictitious. The books of Samuel con a 
tian a multitude of falsehooes. There are 
" no prophecies in the Psalms. Daniel is full 

* Oalm Inquiry, p. 12, 19, 18$, 



LETTER VI 



tJ of stories contrived or exaggerated by 
^superstition. With the other Prophets, 
" Christians have no concern."* Eichhorn, 
another German Unitarian, accounts for prophe- 
cy by referring it rather to human penetra- 
tion and ingenious conjecture, than to inspi- 
ration. Semler, of the same country, on 2 Pe- 
ter i. 21, where it is written, The prophecy 
came not in old time by the will of man; but 
holy men of God spake as they were moved by 
ihe Holy Ghost, remarks, "Peter speaks there 
u according to the conception of the Jews. 
" The Prophets may have delivered the off- 
" spring of their own brains as divine 
revelations.!" 

Let none say, "These last are German Uni- 
" tarians, whose extravagances are well known, 
"and between whom and the Unitarians in this 
"country there is no alliance." Rely on it, my 
friends, whoever may endeavour to persuade 
you to believe the contrary, the fundamental 
principles of both are the same; the one have 
learned to go a little further than the others* 

* Erskine's Sketches of Church History, &c. Vol. I. p. &4 
f Erskine's Sketches, &c. p. f 1. 

18 



206 



LETTER VI. 



and are only less restrained by publick opinion) 
but the others will probably soon overtake 
them. Certainly they are on the same road. 

These quotations clearly go to show, not only 
that the writers whose words they are, virtual- 
ly reject the inspiration of the scriptures, (for 
what is that inspiration worth, which admits of 
'inconclusive reasoning" — u gross mistakes"— 
* ; lame accounts" — and deliberate sacrifices to 
Vm popular prejudices and delusions?") but also 
that they stand ready to expunge from the sacred 
volume, or to explain away, any passages which 
do not entirely accord, with their pre-determined 
opinions. Thus, instead of bringing their opin- 
ons to the Bible, to be tried and decided by 
it, as the only perfect standard ; they bring the 
Bible to their opinions, to be judged, modi- 
fied, and decided by them. What is this, but 
making their own reason the supreme judge of 
truth, instead of the word of Him who is the 
source of all reason? What is it, in effect, but 
every man's making his own notions (for these 
are the dictates of his reason) his highest rule of 
faith? And wherein does this essentially differ 
from the doctrine of the Deist, who acknowl- 



LETTER VL 



207 



edges that there is much truth in the Bible, but 
denies its inspiration, and receives only so much 
of its contents as accords with his views of what 
is reasonable? 

But the following extracts speak a still more 
daring language, and must, 1 think, banish all 
doubt from the minds of those who have hereto- 
fore entertained any, respecting the deep and 
thorough corruption of Unitarian principles, 
in regard to tha scriptur©!, 

Dr. Priestley, in his History of Early Opin- 
ions^ with a degree of frankness which always 
distinguished him, declares, that even "if the 
" doctrine of the Trinity had been found in 
" the scriptures, it would have been impossi* 
u ble for any reasonable man to believe it, as it 
44 implies a contradiction, which no miracles can 
"prove."* The same writer, commenting on 
John vi. 62, What, and if you shall see the Son 
of man ascend up where he was before? and 
endeavouring to shew that it affords no evidence 
of Christ's existence before he appeared in this 
world, uses the following wonderful language— 

* Vol. I. p. 48. 



LETTER VI, 



^Though not satisfied with any interpretation 
yrtBat has been given of this extraordinary pas^ 
- sage; yet, rather than believe our Saviour to 
11 have existed in any other state, before the ere- 
^ ation of the world, or to have left some state 
u of great dignity and happiness when he came 
si hither, I would have recourse to the old and 
Si exploded Socinian idea of Christ's actual as? 
44 cent into heaven, or of his imagining that he 
'had bean carried up thither, in a vision, which, 
* 4 like that of Paul, he haef not mm able to 

" DISTINGUISH FROM A REALITY* Nay, 1 would 

u not build an article of faith of such magnitude 

" On THE CORRECTNESS OF JoHN^S RECOLLEC- 
* { TION, AND REPRESENTATION OF OUR Lord's 

"language; and so strange and incredible 
is does the hypothesis of a pre-existent state 
"appear, that, sooner than admit it, I would 

u SUPPOSE THE WHOLE VERSE TO BE AN inter- 
polation; or that thb old Apostle dicta - 
u ted one thing, and his amanuensis wrote 
14 another."* Nor is language of this kind 
confined to Dr. Priestley. He only copied it 
from his equally daring predecessors. Faustus 
Socinus, treating of the doctrine of Atonement ^ 

* Letters to Br. Price, p. 57, 58, 



LETTER VL 



i03 



speaks in the following bold and unequivocal 
manner: "For my part, though the doctrine 
" were stated not oxce merely, but often, 

46 IN THR SACRED RECORDS, I Would Hot, Oil" that 

41 account, believe it. 75 * Speaking of the 
doctrine of the incarnation of Christ, Smalaus, 
another distinguished foreign Unitarian, with 
equal explicitness, declares— "Although it 
" were affirmed in Scripture, not once and 
" again, but very frequently, and most ex- 
pressly, that God became man, we think it 
" much better, on account of the great absurdi- 
£J ty of that doctrine, and its evident contradict 
" tion to sound reason, and its blasphemy against 
4i God, to imagine a certaix mode of speak- 
t; ixg, by which such things may be said eon* 
" cerning God, than to understand the words in 
" their simple and literal meaning."! 

It seems, then, that if there had beex, not 
merely one, or a small number, but many hun- 
dreds of passages, in which the doctrines of the 
Trinity, and of the Divinity and Atonement of 
Jesus Christ, were taught in the most precise 
and unequivocal manner that could be conceiv 

*Soci>-i Opera, torn. II. p. 204. 
f HomiL Vllt ; ad cap, I. Joham, 

18* 



810 



LETTER VL 



ed; if all the powers of langaage and of logick 
had been laid under contribution to express 
these doctrines in the way least of all liable to 
doubt or misconstruction; if we had been told 
often, that "there are three Persons in the God- 
"head, the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
" Ghost, and that these three are one, the same 
u in substance, equal in power and glory that 
Jesus Christ is very God, and very man in the 
same mysterious Person; and that He died as 
the substitute of his people, to make atonement 
for their sins, and to bring in a vacarious right- 
eousness for their justification before God; — if 
we had been told all this ever so often, and 
ever so expressly, still it would have been all in 
▼ain, as to the establishment of these doctrines 
as true. It is pre-determined that they can- 
not possibly be true. Of course it would be 
impossible to reveal them with such clearness 
of light, or explicitness of language, as to com- 
mand belief. 

Accordingly, the manner in which Unitarians 
have actually treated, and interpreted the scrip- 
tures, is a comment on the principles which they 
kave avowed, as instructive as it is shocking^ 



LETTER VL 



211 



A few specimens of this manner will be given^ 
as proof that they do not shrink from the appli- 
cation of their own principles; and will abun- 
dantly suffice to show of what Unitarianism is 
capable. They are taken from the publications 
of some of the most respectable leaders of that 
sect in modern times; men most of whom Amer- 
ican Unitarians continually quote, and recom- 
mend in the most respectful terms. 

The narrative in Genesis, respecting Abra- 
ham^ offering up his son Isaac, is thus explain- 
ed by Eichhorn, a Unitarian of Germany. "Jlbra* 
"ham dreamed that he must offer up Isaac, and 9 
tl according to the superstition of the times ? 
" regarded it as a divine admonition. He pre- 
pared to execute the command, which his 
Q dream had conveyed to him. A lucky acci* 
u dent (probably the rustling of a ram entan- 
"gled in the bushes) hindered it; and this, ac° 
"cording to ancient idiom, was also the 
" voice of the Divinity."* 

The same writer gives it as his opinion, thai 
Moses* account of the creation and fall of man^ 

% vSee Professor Stuart's learned and able Letters, p, 14$, 



216 



LETTER VL 



is merely a poetical, philosophical specu- 
lation of some ingenious person, on the origen 
of the world, and of evil. So that, whenever 
he meets with any circumstance in the narrative, 
ftot to be accounted for on natural principles, he 
removes all difficulty by ascribing it to poet- 
ick fiction. 

}n Cohssians i. 16, &c. we find these words— 
For by Him (i. e. by Christ) were all things ere* 
ated, that are in heaven and that are in earth, 
visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or 
dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things 
were created by Him, and for Him, and He is 
before all things, and by Him all things consist * 
Mr, Belsham, after a number of remarks intend- 
ed to show, that creation, in this passage, has 
a very different meaning from that which w T e are 
accustomed to attach to the term, and that all 
things here spoken of, mean, not material or 
physical objects, but moral dispensations; he 
croes on to assert that the language of this pas- 
sage is as applicable to a certain European mon- 
arch, then in his glory, as to Jesus Christ. The 
following are his words. "Of a certain person 
" who now makes a very considerable figure in 



LETTER VI. 



213 



* c the world, it may be said with truth, so far as 
" the civil state of the continent of Europe is 
" concerned, that he is the creator of all these 
" new distinctions, high and low, whether 
" thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or 
"powers; all these things are made by him 5 
"and for him, and he is before them all; takes 
"precedence, both in time and dignity, and by 
"him do all these things consist, Yet who 
" would infer from such language as this, that 
" the present ruler of France is a being of supe* 
"riour order to mankind, much less that he is 
"the maker of the world? The language 

" WHPCH IS TRUE OF BUONAPARTE, IN A CIVIL 
"VIEW, IS APPLICABLE TO JeSUS CHRIST IN A 

"moral view; but it no more implies pre-ex° 
" istence or proper creative power, in one case 9 
"than in the other,' 9 * The view given of the 
same passage in the authorized Unitarian Ver* 
sion of the New Testament, is little, if any better* 
u The creation which the Apostle here ascribes 
" to Christ, expresses that great change which 
" was introduced into the moral world, and par- 
" ticularly into the relative situation of Jews and 
" Gentiles, by the dispensation of the Gospel, 
* Letten on Arianism, p, l%9> #t\ 



814 



LETTER VI. 



"This great change the Apostle here describes 
^ under the symbol of a revolution introduced 
" by Christ among certain ranks and orders of 
" beings, by whom, according to the Jewish 

U BEMONOLOGY, BORROWED FRO ML THE OriEN- 

" tal philosophy, the affairs bf states and in- 
dividuals were superintended and governed."* 

Another Unitarian writer, of no small repu* 
tation 5 in commenting on i. Cor, Hi 11, Other 
foundation can no man lay than thai is laid*, 
which is Je$u$ Christ; tells us, that bj Jesus 
Christ here is meant the doctrine of the 
Gospel; that the most important part of the 
Gospel is the preceptive part; and that, there- 
fore, the meaning of the text is, that obedi- 
ence to the precepts or the Gospel is the 

ONLY SURE FOUNDATION OF HOPE FOR ETERNAL 
LlFE.t 

Mr. Bd sham, in his Calm Inquiry, p. 178, 
referring to our Saviour's declaration, Matt* 
xv Hi. 20, For where two or three are gathered 
together in my name, there am I in the midst 
of them, informs us that we are to understand 

* Improved Version. Lxndsey's Sequel, p. 477, 
f Dr. Harwood on 1 Cor. iii. 11* 



LETTER VL 



our Lord as saying, "Such request, dictated 
" by my authority, and prompted by the spirit 
"which I will communicate, will be as etfica- 

" ClOUS AS IF I MYSELF WERE PERSONALLY 

"present." The same writer, (p. 179) re- 
marking on Matt. ix, 4. and Mark ii. 8, says 
■ — "By these expressions, perhaps the historic 
" ans, Matthew and Mark, might mean nothing 
" more than that he judged from their coun- 
tenances what was passing in their 
" hearts." 

Dr. Priestley, commenting on Ephesians i. 10 5 
says — "To the phrase, things in heaven, and 
" things on earth, it is possible that the Apos- 

" tie MIGHT NOT ANNEX ANY DEFINITE IDEAS, 

" intending only to express how very great and 
* 4 comprehensive, the scheme of the Gospel was* 
44 Or he might allude to that saying of our Sa- 
c# viour, all power is given unto me in heaven 
u and on earth; by which we are to understand 
"that all things, even divine interpositions, if 
" necessary, will be subservient to the 
" spread of the Gospel. 35 * 

* -Notes- on all the Books of Scripture* 



216 



LETTER VL 



The passage in Ephesians iii. 9, Who crea- 
ted all things by Jesus Christ, is thus explained 
by the same writer. "The Apostle alludes to 

" the NEW CREATION, OT the RENOVATION OF 

44 men, or of the world, by the Gospel, and 
"not the creation of the heavens and the earth; 
"a notion which I am confident would never 
"have come into the minds of any christians. 
" who had not previously learned something 
"like it in the principles of Platonism. In the 
"idea of the Apostles, the promulgation of the 
" Gospel made a new and great sera in the his- 
" tory of the world, from which things took, as 
"it were, a new commencement; and this he 
"figuratively calls a new creation, the great 
" agent in which was Jesus Christ.'* 

In commenting on Ephesians, v. 2, where the 
Apostle says, Christ hath also loved us, and hath 
given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice fa 
God; the same distinguished Unitarian thus 
explains the passage — "Here Christ is repre- 
sented in his death as a sacrifice; but it is 
"only by way of figure; as any man dying 
"in a good cause, may be said to be a sa- 
crifice to it." JBut did not Peter and Paul 



LETTER 



suffer, and finally laj down their lives, in the 
same cause? Yet are they, any where in scrip- 
ture, represented as a sacrifice for the sins of 
men? Or are we ever said to be saved by that 
sacrifice, or by the shedding of their blood? 
Truly such unhallowed trifling with the Sa- 
viour's character, and with the language of the 
Holy Spirit, fills me with horror! 

In 1 Peter i. 12, it is written. Which things 
the angels desire to look into. This passage 
Unitarians must explain in accordance with 
their opinion, that tnere are no such spiritual 
beings as Angels at ail. In the Improved Uni- 
tarian Version, therefore, the following comment 
upon it is found — "Perhaps the meaning of the 
" Apostle may be, that the messengers, (min- 
" isters) who are now employed to promulgate 
" this glorious doctrine, cannot fully comprehend 
" its import, and are desirous of improving their 
&t acquaintance with it.' 5 

In the same Version, we find the following 
comment on 1 Peter iii. 18. For Christ also 
hath once suffered for sins, the jvst for the un- 
just, that he might bring us to God. Christ 

19 



LETTER m. 



suffered for sin, not by bearing the "punishment 
"due to sin, but to introduce and ratify a 
"dispensation, by which the idolatrous 
46 heathen would be admitted into cove- 
H NANT with God. 

In 2 Peter ii. 4, these words occur — For if 
God spared not the Angels that sinned, but cast 
them down to hell, How is this passage to 

be disposed of, in consistency with the Unitari- 
an doctrine, that there is no devil, and no good 
or bad angels? With perfect ease, as follows— 
If God spared not the Angels that sinned, &c. 
u Or if God spared not the messengers who had 
" sinned, i. e. the spies who were sent to 

" EXPLORE THE LAND OF CANAAN, &LC. But 

t& if the common interpretation be admitted, it 
5 will not establish the popular doctrine concer- 
ning fallen Angels; for 1. The Epistle it- 

u SELF IS OF DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY* 2. From 

"the change of style, this is the most 

DOUBTFUL PORTION OF THE EPISTLE. 3. By 

those who admit the genuineness of the Epis- 
^tle, this chapter is supposed to have been a 
;i quotation from some ancient apocryphal 

book; and the Apostle might not mean to 



LETTER VI, 



219 



S GIVE AUTHORITY TO THE DOCTRINE, but to 

"argue with his readers upon known and allow- 
" ed principles — fee."* 

The explicit declaration of the Apostle., 2 
Peter iii. 12, 13, is thus unceremoniously con- 
tradicted in the Improved Unitarian Version, 
" This, in a literal sense, is impossible, be- 

" CaUSe THE HEAVENS ARE INCOMBUSTIBLE* 

" Nor is it reasonable to believe that an event 

" SO LITTLE COUNTENANCED BY NATURAL A? 

" pearanges, as that of the destruction of the 
" earth hy a general conflagration, is the subject 
11 of a divine prediction. It is well known, that 
" in the language of prophecy, great political 
" changes and revolutions are foretold under the 
"symbol of terrible convulsions in the natural 
" world — The heavens and the earth which are 
" now, v. 7, must necessarily signify the Jew 
44 ish dispensation, or the then moral state of the 
" world, which must pass away to make room 
"for the promulgation of the christian religion. 
"But this revolution cannot take place without 
" producing great changes and convulsions in 
" the political world, which in prophetick lan- 

'* Improved Version 



LETTER VL 



1 g aa g e ? is expressed by the heavens being on 
;i fire, the elements malting, and the earth, with 
* the works on it, being burned up." 

Once more; the first two chapters of the Gos- 
pel according to St. Matthew, and the first two 
of the Gospei by St. -Luke, are so explicit in 
asserting the miraculous conception of Christ, 
that ihey have always been considered by sober 
Christians as perfectly decisive against the Uni- 
tarian system. Unitarians, perceiving this, have 
generally agreed to expunge the whole of 

THESE CHAPTERS FROM BOTH THE EVANGELISTS, 

except a few verses, which they suppose may be 
reconciled with their scheme. On what plea, do 
you suppose they take this liberty with the sacred 
text? Not because the chapters in question are 
wanting in any of the manuscript copies of the 
original; for they are confessedly found in all 
of them. Not because they are wanting in any 
of the early and most respectable versions; for 
Unitarians do not deny that in all these also 
they are found. Not because they find the least 
authority from any early writer, for believing 
that those chapters made no part of the origi- 
nal Gospels. But they alledge, that the Ebion- 



LETTER VL 



iies and Marcion, (who, as jou have seen in the 
last Letter, were hereticks of the second centu- 
ry) excluded those chapters from the Gospel as 
used by them: and, therefore, as their successors 
in heresy, they think proper to expunge the 
same chapters now. But how shall we account 
for it that modern Unitarians, while they follow 
the Ebionites and Marcion in their rejection of 
these passages from Matthew and Luke, do not 
go further, and imitate them in their still more 
serious mutilation of the sacred Oracles? The 
Ebionites rejected the three entire Gospels of 
Mark, Luke and John, and all the Epistles of 
Paul: and Marcion refused to receive as canoni- 
cal any part of the Old Testament, or indeed 
any part of the New, which contained quotations 
from the Old, The only Gospel he received was 
that of Luke, and even from that he expunged 

WHATEVER HE DID NOT APPROVE.* If these 

ancients hereticks are to be followed as authority 
at all, why not fully? Is it that publick opinion 
would not allow, at present, of such bold and deep 
mutilation as they ventured upon; but that it was 
thought necessary to get rid, at least, of the trou- 
blesome passages in question, at all hazards'? 

* Ward law's .Discourses , p. 179. 

19* 



222 



LETTER YL 



I have now endeavoured faithfully to lay be- 
fore you, boch text and comment on this subject : 
both the avowed Unitarian doctrine respecting 
the interpretation of the scriptures, and a fair 
exemplification of their doctrine, as drawn from 
J.heir own expositors, I appeal to you, my 
Christians Friends, whether you can conceive of 
departures from every principle of fair construc- 
tion more manifest and unwarrantable; of per- 
versions more outrageous; and of invasions of 
the sacred text more bold, violent, and impious? 
If this mode of treating the Holy Scriptures be 
admissible, then I should say, there is an end of 
all confidence in the Bible, as a rule of faith: 
any thing may be proved from it, that a disor= 
dered imagination, or a depraved heart, may 
happen to fancy. It would be as reasonable to 
appeal to revelation in arguing with a Deist, as 
in arguing with a Unitarian of this stamp. 
Nay, on this plan, the scriptures, instead of 
being a light to the feet,, and a lamp to the path, 
of the humble inquirer, are rather fitted to be- 
wilder, to darken counsel, and to lead astray. 

The Orthodox do not, indeed, deny that the 
scriptures contain much figurative language; 



LETTER VI. 



223 



nay, that they abound in figure; that they em- 
ploy very many expressions and representa- 
tions, in condescension to human weakness; and 
many allusions, which can only be understood by 
comparing scripture with scripture, and all with 
the other works of God. Still they maintain, that 
the Bible is to be interpreted upon the same gene- 
ral principles with other books; that is, that the 
plain, simple, obvious sense, is to be adopted, un- 
less the undoubted connection, or the still plainer 
and more unquestionable sense of other passa- 
ges, forbids it. Thus when the Saviour says of 
himself — / am the Door: when the Apostle 
says of Him, that He is a tried corner Stone; 
and when it is said of our first parents, in the 
event of their falling from their primitive recti- 
tude, ye shall be as Gods, knowing good and 
evil; and in another place, of mere men, / have 
said ye are Gods; every one understands the 
expressions, in all these cases, to be figurative^ 
and not to be construed literally. In like man- 
ner, when the inspired writers speak of the 
right hand of God, and of his rising from his 
seat, and coming forth oat of his place, to mani- 
fest his power, no one supposes that Jehovah has 
bodily members, or that He is limited to any 



324 



LETTER VI. 



place; but the language is universally under- 
stood to be analogous to that which we all use* 
when we speak of the arm, or the frown, of civil 
government; by which every one perceives to 
be meant, the exertion of the authority, or the 
expression of the disapprobation, of the indi- 
vidual or individuals who execute a nation's 
will. 

So far, and to a similar extent in all analogous 
cases, the most sober Orthodox criticks go, in 
the interpretation of scripture. Such use of 
figurative language belongs to all ages and coun- 
tries; and is just as well understood, as when 
we speak of a tide of success, or a gust of pas- 
sion, or the opening of a door of usefulness. 
Neither have the Orthodox any objection to 
that sober criticism of the sacred text, which 
leads to attempts at new and more exact trans* 
lation, and to illustrations drawn from a compar- 
ison of manuscripts, and from the best ancient 
versions. All this they consider as perfectly 
fair, and as warranted, no less by the reverence 
which is due to God's word, than by the prin- 
ciples which are applied to the interpretation of 
all ancient books. But these legitimate rules ef 



ETTER VL 



225 



interpretation, established at once by good sense, 
and by general practice, by no means, as you 
have seen, content Unitarian expositors. Every 
usage of language must be abandoned; every 
rule of grammar must be violated; the plain 
and universally received meaning of terms must 
be set aside; and passages, which, in their sim- 
ple and obvious sense, appear natural, and in- 
telligible to the humblest capacity, must be for- 
ced, and perverted, in a manner which reverses 
all just principles of construction, and draws 
from the whole a meaning so remote, so cold, so 
vapid, and so far beneath what the language 
would seem naturally to import, that a serious 
inquirer is equally astonished and mortified at 
the result. How would this mode of interpreta- 
tion be viewed, with respect to any other book? 
Would it not be deemed unfair and presump- 
tuous in the highest degree? How much more 
exceptionable, then, when applied to that book 
which professes to be dictated by the Spirit of 
God, and which treats of subjects which, of all 
others, are most beyond the reach of our minds! 

If the B«ble contains a revelation from God 
to the mass of mankind, and is expressly intend- 



LETTER VI. 



ed to teach them the way of duty and happi- 
ness, we must suppose it adapted to the purpose 
for which it was given: that is, we must sup- 
pose it to be a plain book, suited to the common 
people, as well as to the learned and wise. The 
Gospel wag originally preached to the poor; and 
is fitted no less to nourish babes in Christ, than 
to support and invigorate strong men. The Bi- 
ble, it is true, has depths which are beyond the 
ken of angels; and portions of its contents by 
no means unfrequently occur, which require 
much various knowledge to enable any one to 
pursue them with intelligence and satisfaction. 
While there is more than enough in the scrip- 
tures, as there is in the great Author of them, 
to fill the most enlarged intellect, and to give 
scope and exercise to the most profound erudi- 
tion; yet it is equally certain, that the great 
body of those truths which relate to our com- 
mon salvution, which hold forth to us redemption 
through the blood of Christ, even the forgiveness 
of sins, according to the riches of his grace, and 
which enforce the various duties of the christian 
life, are plain, and level to the most common 
capacity, disposed humbly to receive them* 
They are, indeed, so plain, that we are assured. 



LETTER VL 



he who runs may read them; and even the way- 
faring man, though a fool, shall not err therein* 
Such is the representation every where given 
on this subject, in the sacred volume itself* 
Nothing more is necessary, as we are assured, 
to enable a simple, unlettered man to read the 
word of God with intelligence and profit, than 
common sense, accompanied with an humble and 
teachable disposition. But if the Unitarian no- 
tions be correct, then the bible is a sealed book: 
a book of all otoers least fitted for the common 
people; and rather calculated to mislead than to 
instruct; until some Unitarian expositor comes 
to open the seals; and, by means of his various 
readings, his conjectural emendations, and his 
complicated criticism, to dispel the darkness 
which must otherwise rest upon it. Is this 
credible? I must candidly declare, that if I be- 
lieved it, I should be strongly inclined to concur 
with the Papists in withholding the scriptures 
from the laity, as unfit to be trusted in the hands 
of any but the initiated. Can such a view of 
the subject be tolerated by those who believe 
that all scripture is given by the inspiration of 
God, and is profitable; that holy men of God 
spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost; 



2S8 



LETTER VL 



and that not many wise men after the flesh, not 
many mighty, not many noble are called; but 
that God hath chosen the weak things of the 
world to confound the things which are mighty, 
and foolish things to confound the wise, and 
things which are despised, hath God chosen^ 
yea and things which are not, to bring to naught 
things that are^ that no flesh should glory in his 
presence ? 

Let me entreat you here, my Christian Breth* 
ren, to look back, for a moment, to the beginning 
of my fourth Letter, and then say, whether the 
passages of scripture, setting forth the Sa* 
vtour's glory, and the work of redemption by 
him, there quoted, can possibly be considered* 
upon any established principles of interpreting 
metaphorical language, as importing any thing 
less than his Divinity and Atonement! I appeal 
to your candour, whether, if we construe those 
passages as Unitarians tell us we ought, there 
is a single fact or doctrine recorded in the Bible, 
which we can venture, with confidence, to inter- 
pretj as containing literal truth? Shall we not 
be constrained to admit, that the Resurrection 
df the body;, is to be considered, not as a literal. 



LETTER TL 



but as a metaphorical event? Where shall we 
draw the line, on any subject, between reality 
and mere figure of speech? 

Accordingly, while we notice the characterise 
tick tendency of Unitarians to apply to the Bi= 
ble the most forced and unnatural principles of 
interpretation, it is curious to observe what por- 
tions of scripture they are, to which these prin- 
ciples are most frequently and elaborately appli- 
ed. They are precisely those portions which 
are most hostile to the Unitarian system. When 
the advocates of that system meet with passa- 
ges which appear strongly to teach the Trinity 
of Persons in Jehovah; the Deity and Atone- 
inent of the Redeemer, and other allied doc- 
trines; then it is that the mightiest efforts of 
their wonder-working management are put in 
requisition; then it is that the plainest terms 
lose their ordinary and direct meaning, and are 
made to speak something essentially different, if 
not opposite. Other parts of scripture are com- 
monly left to speak their native, simple lan- 
guage; but these never. Has not this a most 
suspicious aspect? when persons are ready to 
interpret like other people those passages which 

20 



230 



LETTER VL 



do not implicate their peculiar creed; but imme= 
diately adopt the most singular aijd unwarranta- 
ble principle of exposition, when those which 
do implicate them, are in question; can charity 
herself forbear to indulge suspicions of the most 
unpleasant kind? 

Further; in marking the distinctive characters 
of the Orthodox and the Unitarians, as to their 
manner of studying the scriptures, I have also 
thought that I could, every where, perceive this 
difference:— With the Orthodox, the explaining 
and applying the word of God, is chiefly an af- 
fair of the heart. They contend, indeed, as 
much as any professing christians, for the exer- 
cise of the understanding in the interpretation 
of scripture, and in every department of reli- 
gion: and it is presumed that they go as far as 
any in giving proofs of this exercise. But still, 
in the study of the scriptures, unless I am de- 
ceived, they are distinguished, above all others, 
by a spirit of affectionate devotion. The views 
which they take of Gospel truth, are peculiarly 
suited to humble, to soften, to interest the feel- 
ings in the highest degree, to engage and ele- 
vate the affections, and to inspire joy and peace 



LETTER VL 



in believing. Accordingly, when the Orthodox, 
who are pious, read the Bible with a practical 
view, they, for the most part, wish to have the 
spirit of criticism dormant, and to lay open 
their minds to those heart-affecting, self-abasing, 
and purifying impressions, which are, at once* 
more delightful and more profitable than any 
other. When they read, that the blood of Jesus 
Christ cleanseth from all sin; \hat He bare 
our sins in his own body on the tree; that fie 
is the propitiation for our sins; and that He. 
gave himself for as, that He might redeem us 
from all iniquity—they delight to yield them- 
selves to all the constraining influence of re- 
deeming love, and to dwell with the liveliest 
wonder, gratitude, and joy, on the unparal- 
leled scenes of the Garden and the Cross* 
They never enjoy themselves so well, in the pe- 
rusal of the scriptures, as when, gazing on the 
unutterable wonders of the incarnation and suf- 
ferings of the Son of God, the love of his Per- 
son becomes their ruling passion, and conformity 
to his example and will, the precious model of 
their lives* 



LETTER VI. 



But how different the spirit with which Uni- 
tarians approach and peruse the scriptures! 
With them the study of the sacred volume ap- 
pears to be chiefly a cold intellectual exer- 
cise* They take it up very much as they 
would take up a Latin or Greek classick; con* 
sidering tt a indied, as treating of far more im- 
portant §ubj€€tij but M proper to be examined 
with the fame spirit of fnae, bold, and rven imp* 
tical scrutiny; as prepar to be impacted, and 
questioned at every turn, Accordingly, they 
never seem to be so much at home in the Bible, 
as when estimating the comparative value of 
ancient manuscripts: discovering and expung- 
ing passages alledged to be spurious; and set- 
tling the niceties of verbal criticism. Their 
peculiar element seems to consist in persuading 
themselves and others not to believe too 
M¥ch; and in endeavouring to shew that the 
scriptures speak a language less serious, less 
affecting, and less solemn, than the Orthodox 
imagine. In short, their object seems to be at- 
tained, exactly in proportion to the degree in 
which they can divest the word of God of those 
truths and characteristics which are peculiarly 
fitted to warm, to elevate, and to enrapture the 



LETTER VI. 



23S 



heart; in which they can reduce its contents to 
little more than a system of cold, heartless eth- 
icks. With them, the amazing scenes of Geth*> 
semane and Calvary, are brought down to a 
level with the events ^of common history; and 
all those immeasurable glories and benefits of 
the Saviour, which are adapted to fix the heart, 
and to move the profoundest affections of the 
christian, are either wholly denied, or, with a 
frigid ingenuity, explained away. 

Which of these systems, then, my Friends ; 
ought the serious christian to countenance?— 
That which honours the Bible, as the inspired 
word of God; or that which virtually denies 
its inspiration, and places it on a level with 
mere human compositions ?— That which bows 
to it, as the infallible rule of fakh and practice, 
to Which nothing can be added, and from which 
nothing can be taken; or that which establishes 
a higher tribunal than the scriptures, and main- 
tains the lawfulness of adding to them, and ex 
punging from them, at pleasure ?— That which 
interprets the word of God in a simple, natural, 
analogical manner; or that which applies to it 
principles of exposition often the most forc^ 
20* 



^34 



LETTER Vi- 



and unnatural that can be conceived; principles 
which would be rejected with indignation if ap- 
plied to any other book? — In fine, that which 
recognizes in the sacred volume all those fea- 
tures of grandeur and glory, which are adapted 
to fill and warm the heart; or that which would 
divest it of all those features, and hold up the 
inspired writers as continually using the most 
bold and high-sounding language, to express the 
most diminutive and common ideas? — Which of 
these systems, I say, ought the serious christian 
to countenance? — It is impossible to hesitate* 
The former is the humble, filial spirit of chil- 
dren sitting at the feet of the Saviour, and learn- 
ing of Him, as the great and all wise Prophet 
of his church; the latter, is the genuine spirit 
of infidelity, to which, under all its disguises, 
the Christian ought to say, with his Master— 
Get thee behind me, Satan; for thou savourest 
not the things , that be of God r but the things thai 
he of meuo 



LETTER VII. 



Truth to be tried by its practical influence— Objections 
to Unitarianism on this ground — Unitarianism dis- 
posed to deny or conceal its principles — Indifferent to 
Truth — Hostile ta the exercises of Vital Piety — - 
Deficient in yielding support and consolation in 
Death — Unfriendly to the spirit of Missions — Every 
where more agreeable to Infidels, than any other 
system which bears the Christian name, 

Christian Brethren^ 

The principle, that truth must be tried by its 
moral influence, is as old as truth itself. By 
their fruits ye shall know them, is a maxim of 
our Lord, which common sense, and every part 
of scripture, conspire to enforce. This is a test 
to which we ought to be willing to bring all our 
own opinions; and by which every wise man 
will be careful to try the spirits, whether they 
&re of God, 



LETTER VII. 



Whether Unitarianism can, advantageously,, 
stand this test, is a question which I desire in 
this letter candidly to examine. The consider- 
ations urged in the foregoing Letters against the 
Unitarian system, are, to my mind, perfectly 
conclusive. That system which finds no coun- 
tenance in the word of God; which has been 
opposed by the pious in all ages; and the advo- 
cates of which have always been cast of the 
Church, and denied the name of Christian, sure- 
ly has little claim to our respect or confidence. 
But I have soma further objections to this sys- 
tem, which press upon my mind with irresistible 
force, and which compel me to believe that it is 
" not ,of God/' These are objections drawn 
from the practical influence of Unitarianism, in a 
^reat variety of respects. This branch of the 
controversy between the Orthodox and Unitari- 
ans, has been treated, as many of you know, in 
a very able and satisfactory manner, by the 
Rev. Mr. Fuller, in a work to which I before 
referred, and, which I would again recommend 
to your careful perusal. The points, however 5 
to which I wish, at present, to call your atten- 
tion, are such as that eminent servant of Christ 
has either wholly omitted to notice, or has treat- 
ed in a very cursory manner. 



LETTER VL 



L The first of the objections which I propose 
to consider, is that Unitarians manifest, more re- 
markably than any other sect with which I am 
acquainted, a disposition to deny or con- 
ceal THEIR RELIGIOUS OPINIONS, 

The sacred Scriptures Solemnly enjoin upon 
u§ t not only to search diligently after the truth; 
but aSso^ having discovered it, to hold it fast | to 
be ever ready to profess our belief of it, and ever 
ready, alao, to give an answer to every am that 
asketh a reason of the hope that is in us* Nor 
can I conceive how the command, to confes§ 
Christ before men, or the duty of shunning to 
declare all the counsel of God, can be duly re- 
garded, especially by ministers of the Gospei ? 
without a frank and habitual readiness to make 
known the truth as it is in Jesus, to all who ask 
to be instructed, or are willing to receive it. 
And I presume it will not be denied, that the 
Orthodox^ in genera], have not only manifested 
a disposition to attach much importance to doc- 
trinal opinions; but also no less of a disposition 
to embrace every suitable opportunity to com- 
municate and preach them. 



t 



i38 



LETTER VIL 



But, unless I am greatly deceived, the same 
cannot, with truth, be said of Unitarians, On 
the contrary, I am persuaded, that, in all ages, 
^ince the first appearance of Unitarianism in the 
church of Christ, a disposition to practice the 
arts of concealment, denial, and evasion, when- 
ever there was any considerable temptation to dp 
so, has been one of its most remarkable charac- 
teristic!^. 

More than sixteen hundred years ago, Iren- 
ceus made this complaint concerning certain Uni- 
tarians of his day. "In puelick," says he, 
"they use alluring discourses, because of 
4t the common christians, as they call those who 
4i wear the christian name in general; and to 
^entice them to come often, they pretend to 
" preach like us; and complain, that, although 

" THEIR DOCTRINE BE THE SAME AS OURS, WC 

n abstain from their communion, and call them 
"hereticks. When they have seduced any from 
"the faith by their disputes, and made them 
i{ willing to comply with them, they begin tc 

* c OPEN THEIR MYSTERIES*"* 



2IL cap. 15 



LETTER VIL 



289 



in the case of Paul of Samosata, a distin- 
guished Unitarian of the next century, a similar 
spirit was manifested. You were told, in a for- 
mer Letter, that when charged with holding 
certain opinions which he had preached, he sol- 
emnly denied the charge; nay, denied it on 
oath. Yet, in a little while, he preached the 
same doctrines again, and was again charged 
and again found to deny and equivocate; un~ 
til, at length, the most decisive measures became 
necessary to expose his true character, and to 
exclude him from the sacred office. 

When Arius, the father of the Arians, arose, 
and began to propagate his opinions, he acted ik 
similar part. Finding that these opinions gave 
offence, and were about to become matter of pub- 
lick scrutiny, he professed a willingness to re- 
ceive the popular language concerning them, 
and wished to have it believed that he differed 
but little from the body of the church. Much 
time and ingenuity were employed by the Coun- 
cil which tried him, in attempting to drag him 
from his lurking places, and to extort from him 
an explanation of his views. Nor w 7 as their 
purpose accomplished at last without extreme 



240 



LETTER VII. 



difficulty. Afterwards, indeed, when his fol- 
lowers, for a time, got the civil power into their 
own hands, they were ready enough to avow 
their principles, and to persecute the Orthodox ? 
with far greater fury than ever they had been 
persecuted themselves. 

It is worthy of notice, too, that the same gen- 
eral system of evasion and concealment, was 
adopted by both L&lius and Faustus Socinus^ in 
the sixteenth century. The former joined an 
Orthodox church, and remained in its commu- 
nion while he lived, passing himself off as an 
Orthodox man, with the greater part of those 
with whom he conversed. Nor do his senti- 
ments appear to have been fully disclosed but by 
his private papers after his decease. The lat- 
ter, even after he had adopted his Uncle's 
opinions, and ventured, in a degree, to profess 
them, practised the most unworthy acts, if the 
best historians are to be believed, to conceal or 
to varnish over the most offensive features of his 
system, and to induce the belief that he differed 
much less from the Orthodox church than he 
really did. 



LETTER VIL 



241 



Kor has it been otherwise in latter times. Dr. 
Priestley declared, a few years ago, that there 
were great numbers of persons in the church 
of England, even among the clergy, who, while 
they privately held Unitarian opinions, did not 
scruple in publick to countenance "a mode of 
" worship, which, if they were questioned about 
"it, they would not deny to be, according to 
" their own principles, idolatrous and blasphe* 
" mousH If Mewtofi and Locke were Unita* 
rians, they acted, as I have hinted in a former 
Letter] the same unworthy part. And, if I have 
not been misinformed 5 there is too much reason 
to believe th^t there are a few persons of a sim- 
ilar character, at this time, in the established 
church of Scotland. 

The history of American Unitarianism most 
remarkably accords with these striking facts. 
The course of conduct pursued by the Unita- 
rian clergy in Massachusetts for a number of 
years, was perfectly in character for disciples of 
the distinguished hereticfa already mentioned© 
Strong suspicions that they were friendly, if not 
devoted, to the Unitarian System, were enters 
tained for a considerable time, before direc f 

21 



LETTER V1L 



proof of the fact could be fastened upon them, 
Charges to that amount were frequently made; 
but by most of them repelled, as unkind, and 
even slanderous. They appeared anxious to 
have it believed that they did not differ ma- 
terially from the Orthodox around them. And 
it was not until a publication, made by one of 
.their own friends, beyond the Atlantick, and re- 
published and circulated in this country, had 
grievously offended them, but effectually dis 
closed their views, that any considerable number 
of them consented to take the name of Unita- 
rians. And even now, if I mistake not, while 
they own the general name, they are, most of 
them, extremely reserved in communicating 
their opinions in detail; insomuch that, not only 
the publick at large, but some of their own peo- 
ple, are entirely uncertain what they believe 
concerning some of the fundamental doctrines of 
Christianity* 

May I not venture to say, too, that some of 
the Unitarians in your own neighbourhood, are, 
in some degree, chargeable with the same con- 
duct? You have worshipping assemblies of al- 
most every denomination of christians in your 



LETTER VII. 



City. Respecting the religious sentiments of 
the pastors and teachers of these different de- 
nominations, no one is at a loss. They have 
not only each publickly and solemnly subscribed 
a particular creed; but you can hardly go into 
their respective places of worship, without hear- 
ing their peculiar tenets openly and freely pro- 
claimed. But how 15 it with jour Unitarian 
neighbours? Have they ever told any one, 
fairly and fully, what they believe? I have at- 
tended to their publications, from time to time, 
when they happened to fall in my way, but have 
never been able to discover. I have perceived, 
indeed, that there are many truths, in my view 
all-important, which they do not believe. I 
have perceived, too, that they are very zealous 
in not believing, and are taking unwearied 
pains to persuade others to follow their exam- 
ple. But which of the various Unitarian sys- 
tems, differing so widely from each other, they 
do embrace, I have no recollection of having 
ever seen or heard any thing that enabled me 
to decide. They speak of one writer, of that 
class, as having gone too far, and of another, as 
having expressed himself erroneously; yet, af- 
ter all, they do not inform us whom they are 



H4 



LETTER V1L 



willing to regard as a model, or what scheme 
they actually adopt. Why all this reserve? 
Even if they consider the Orthodox around 
them, as I suppose they do. as a crooked and 
perverse generation, still, themselves being judg» 
es, ought they to be ashamed of Christ ' and of 
his words before them? 

Nay, I have not onty observed a striking re- 
serve among Unitarians, as to the disclosure of 
their sentiments, which I was never able to re- 
concile with correct principles: but I have also 
observed, among many of them, another prac- 
tice, still more evidently, as it appears to me, 
unfair and criminal. I refer to the practice 
complained of by Dr. Wardlaw, in his able re- 
ply to Mr. Yates, and often noticed by others, 
as indulged by Unitarian polemicks. When they 
feel pressed by a text or an argument which 
bears hard on the Socinian hypothesis, they 
take refuge in Arianism, and endeavour to 
maintain that the difficulty vanishes, on the plan 
of the pre-existence and superangelick nature of 
Christ, as held by Arians* On the contrary, 
when pressed by a passage of scripture, or a 
consideration, which wears an aspect unfavoura 



LETTER VII. 



ble to Arianism, they can, with equal dexterity, 
avail themselves of the Socinian doctrine, and 
argue with the lowest Humanitarian. Is thU 
change of armour and of colours, characteristick 
of the christian soldier, or of a warrior of a dif- 
ferent stamp ? Is it characteristick of the king 
dorn of light, or the kingdom of darkness. 

I am far, indeed, from alledging that all 
Unitarians have been chargeable with pursuing 
this disingenuous conduct. In manv cases, 
they have been under no temptation to con- 
ceal or equivocate: but every inducement was 
the other way. Such is now, probably, and has 
been for some time, the state of things in Ger- 
many. And even in situations in which the 
greatest odium was to be incurred in avowing 
Unitarian opinions, some truly honourable ex- 
amples of candour and firmness have been ex- 
hibited. But my position is, and I believe most 
sincerely that it may be maintained— that, in 
all ages, from the time of Ebion to the present 
hour, where the mass of the surrounding popu- 
lation was Orthodox, Unitarians have manifested 
a disposition to conceal their sentiments, to 
equivocate, to evade, and even solemnly to deny 
21* 



246 



LETTER VII. 



£hem, when questioned, and to disguise them w 
selves under the garb of Orthodoxy, to a degree 
which no other sect callhig itself Christian ever 
manifested. 

To what, I ask, is this fact to be ascribed? I 
leave it with You, my Christian Brethren, to 
solve the question. I will only say, that I can 
think of no possible reason for it, but such as 
must stamp the character of deep corruption 
upon the Unitarian cause. 

II. Another strong Objection to the Unitarian 
system, in my mind, is, the tendency which 

IT EVERY WHERE MANIFESTS TO PRODUCE IN- 
DIFFERENCE to Truth. This objection is close- 
ly connected with the preceding; but it de- 
serves more distinct consideration. 

The vital importance of truth, and the duty 
of loving, seeking and maintaining it, are laid 
down in scripture with a degree of plainness 
and force, truly impressive. Great stress is laid 
on receiving the truth in the love of it; on being 
established in the truth; on walking in the truth; 
on being sanctified through the tmth; and on 



LETTER VIL 



contending earnestly for the faith once delivered 
to the saints. We are solemnly warned agains 
believing every spirit ; we are commanded to try 
the spirits zvhether they are of God; to prove all 
things^ and hold fast that which is good. And 
with the language of the Bible, the spirit of the 
pious has, in all ages, most strikingly agreed. 
This appeared eminently in the primitive 
church, in which truth seems to have been 
prized and defended with peculiar affection; 
and all who opposed any of its essential por- 
tions, as you have seen in a former Letter, to 
have been excluded from the body of believers, 
as unworthy of the christian name. The same 
thing is observable in the History of all the Wit- 
nesses for the truth, from the rise of the Papa- 
cy till the Reformation. That which distin 
guished them, was their earnestly contending 
for the essential articles of the christian faith, 
and separating themselves from all hereticks. 
For the same great truths, all the Reformers 
contended, both in their writings and preachings 
and some of them laid down their Jives. And 
perhaps there is no point concerning which the 
Orthodox of the present day, differ more re- 
markably from Unitarians, than in maintain- 



LETTER VII. 



ing the great importance of certain doctrines,, 
and contending for them as fundamental. This 
is not denied by Unitarians themselves? but is, 
on the contrary, continually brought forward by 
them, as matter of reproach against the Ortho- 
dox. With the charge, as such, I have nothing 
to do at present. My sole concern is with the 
acknowledged fact, as a fact that has been most 
remarkably connected with Orthodoxy in all 
ages. And I maintain that it is natural, reasona- 
able, scriptural, and just such a fact as might be 
expected to result from the conviction, that there 
is an essential and eterral difference between 
truth and error, and that they can never coa- 
lesce. 

Now, my objection to Unitarianism is, that it 
is generally found connected with a spirit di- 
rectly the reverse of this; with a marked indif- 
ference to truth; not only with a singular unwil- 
lingness to say much about the articles of its own 
creed in detail; but also with quite as singular 
a disposition to underrate the importance of any 
truth, and to be on friendly terms with the 
advocates of all creeds, except the Or- 
thodox. 



LETTER VII. 



249 



fo believe in the innocence of error, and 
even of fundamental error, is what I ca;l indif- 
ference to truth. And if this be not one of 
the most striking features of Unitarianism, at 
any rate, of the Unitarianism which is most 
prevalent in our country. I am egregiously de- 
ceived. What would be admitted as proof of 
such a belief, before any enlightened and impar- 
tial tribunal? If persons calling themselves Uni- 
tarians differ essentially from each other, with- 
out any bar to constant religious intercourse: if 
some of them consider Christ as possessing a 
real, though derived Divinity; others as the 
most axalted of all creatures; and a third class, 
as a mere man: if some of them think he ought 
to be worshipped, and others that all worship 
directed to him is gross idolatry:, if some of 
them believe that Christ really made, in some 
sense, atonement for sin, and that this atonement 
is the foundation of all christian hope; while 
others regard the doctrine of atonement, in any 
sense, as a mere corruption of Christianity, 
which deserves nothing better than ridicule, or 
abhorrence: if these men, notwithstanding all 
these diversities of opinion, still call each other 
brethren of the same denomination; worship 



BETTER VII. 



and commune together without difficulty; mutu- 
ally praise and recommend each other's books 
and preaching; more especially, if all these dif- 
ferent parties profess to be ready to worship 
and hold communion with the Orthodox, while 
they, at the same time, acknowledge that they 
cannot help considering them as blasphemers 
and idolaters: — Would this be manifesting indif- 
ference to truth, or would it not? Surely the 
answer is not difficult. 

Let us see, then, what are the facts. Dr. 
Samuel Clarke, was a high A nan, or Seim-Ari- 
an. He professed to believe in the Divinity of 
Christ, in a derived and qualified sense. Dr. 
Price was an Arian, of the common stamp, who 
taught that Christ was the most exalted of all 
creatures. Soemus made a still lower estimate 
of the character of the Saviour: he supposed 
him to have been a mere man, but miraculously 
conceived, and taken up into heaven, to be in- 
structed in the divine will; and that, being en- 
dowed with special authority and dignity, he 
ought to be worshipped. Dr. Priestley, as you 
have seen, went lower still. He supposed that 
©hrist was a mere man. born like other men, and 



LETTER VIL 



251 



like other men fallible and peccable. With Dr. 
Priestley, Mr. Belsham substantially agrees. Mr. 
Channing, of Boston,, is said to be an Arian; yet 
he says, that he considers it as "no crime to 
believe with Mr. Belsham;" that is, to consider 
Christ as a mere fallible and peccable man.* And 
Professor Stuart, of Andover, tells us that, if he 
is corrtcty informed, u there are scarcely any 
u of t lie younger preachers of Unitarian senti- 
" ments, in New-England, who are not simple 
Humanitarians ;"t in other words, who do not 
in the main agree with Dr. Priestley and Mr. 
Belsham. Yet, when you come to hear Uni- 
tarians of these different classes speak of each 
other, it is in terms which indicate all that ^de- 
gree of harmony which is necessary to ecclesi- 
aslical communion. They claim each other as 
brethren. They make a common cause when 
attacked. They recommend each others' writ- 
ings; not, indeed, always, with an explicit dec- 
laration that they approve of every thing in 
them; but in a way which an Orthodox man 
would be shocked at doing, concerning any 
books of which he did not, in substance, ap- 

* See his Letter to Mr. Thacher. 1 
^Letters to Mi\ Channing. p. 152? 



252 



LETTER VIL 



prove. When the lowest Humanitarian attempts 
to make a list of those distinguished men from 
whose character he hopes to derive countenance, 
he confidently quotes Arians and even Semi- 
Arians as on his side. And when the highest 
Semi-Arian rtiake's out a -corresponding list, lie 
quotes, without scruple, the most lak Priestley- 
an, ©r Belshamite, as his Unitarian brother! 
Can men who act thus, reasonably complain, if 
a discerning publick consider them as all 
alike, and as having no attachment whatever 
to truth? 

But, what crowns all, as a specimen of Unita- 
rian indifference to truth, is the following decla^ 
ration from Dr. Price, who was just mentioned 
as ranking with the Arians. "Give me but the 
"fact, that Christ is the resurrection and the 
" life, and explain it as you will. Give me but 
"this single truth, that eternal life is the gift of 
" God through Jesus Christ our Lord and Sa- 
u viour, and I shall be perfectly easy with 
" respect to the contrary opinions which are en- 
tertained about THE DIGNITY OF CHRIST; 
41 ABOUT HIS NATURE, PERSON, AND OFFICES, 

"and the manner in which he saves us. Call 



LETTER Ylh 



4 him, if you please, simply a man, endowed 
"with extraordinary powers; or call him a su- 
"perangelick being, who appeared in hu- 
"man nature for the purpose of accomplishing 
"our salvation; or say, (if you can admit a 
" thought so shockingly absurd) that it was the 
"second of three coequal persons in the God- 
"head, forming one person with a human soul ? 
u that came down from heaven, and suffered 
"and died on the cross:— Say, that he saves us 
" merely by being a messenger from God to 
" reveal to us etepnal life, and to confer it up^n 
"us; or say, on the contrary, that he not only 
" reveals to us eternal life, and confers it upon 
" us, but has obtained it for us, by offering him- 
"self a propitiatory sacrifice on the cross, and 
" making satisfaction to the justice of the Deity 
"for our Sins: I shall think such differ- 
" ences of little moment, provided the fact 
41 is allowed, that Christ did rise from the dead, 
ifc and will raise us from the dead, and that all 
" righteous penitents will, through God's grace 
"in him, be accepted and made happy forev* 
« er." — In the opinion of this distinguished Uni- 
tarian, then, it is a question of very little mg« 
&e$t| — not worth contending about,— whether 
22 



i 



LETTER tlL 



Christ be a. Divine Person, or a mere mail; 
tvhether the worship of Christ, be a christian 
duty or gross idolatry; whether his atonement 
be the grand foundation of hope, or a corrupt 
human invention. In his opinion, ail who call 
themselves Christians, may worship and con- 
mune together with perfect concord and affec- 
tion, although they may regard each other, at 
the time, as blasphemers, polytheists, and idola= 
ters! If this be not indifference to truth, I know 
not what deserves the name. If this be the 
rounsel of Unitarians, f must say, O my sov.L 
come not thou into their secret; unto their assem- 
bly, mine honour, be not thou united! 

Dr. Priestley, with his usual frankness, con= 
fesses that many Unitarians have this character^ 
i'stick indifference to truth, and attempts to ac= 
count for it. And, whatever may be thought of 
the private opinions of this eminent man; yet 
his testimony, as a witness, respecting the prin- 
ciples and character of Unitarians, will surely 
be considered as unexceptionable. He speaks 
this*: "Though Unitarian dissenters are not 
44 apt to entertain any doubt of the truth of their 
principles, they do not lay so much stives* 



LETTER VIL 



upon them, as other christians do upon theirs. 
"Nor, indeed, is there any reason why they 
" should, when they do not consider the hold- 
" ing of them to be at all necessary to salvation, 
44 which other christians often do with respect 
" to theirs. Besides, It cannot be de'nied thai 
" many of those who judge so truly concern 
" ing particular tenets in religion, have attained 
"to that cool, unbiassed temper of mind, in con- 
"sequence of becoming more indifferent to re- 
ligion in general, and to all Hie modes and 
"doctrines of it 8 Though, therefore, they are in 
"a more favourable situation for distinguishing 
"between truth and falsehood, they are not 
"likely to acquire a zeal for what they conceive 
" to be truth."* The Author does not, indeed, 
apply this representation to all Unitarians, but 
only to a particular class of them; but he un- 
doubtedly, at the same time, intimates that 
persons of that denomination, generally, attach 
much less importance to religious truth than 
most other professing christians; and that there 
are solid reasons why, upon their principles, 
they should do so. This is sufficient for mv 
purpose. 

* Discourses on Various Subjects, p< 95: 96 > 



^58 



LETTER TIL 



and delightful interest in the bosom of every onfe 
who loves the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. 

But, I ask, is Unitarianism friendly to these 
exercises, as a system of experimental piety? 
Is it consistent with them? Is it not directly hos- 
tile to them? Nay, do not the great body of 
Unitarians ridicule these exercises as fanatical 
and delusive? In fact, are not their views of hu- 
man nature, of the Saviour's character, and of 
Ihe ground of hope toward God, utterly irrecon- 
cileable with such views and feelings as have 
been described, and which hold so conspicuous 
a place among the pious breathings of scripture 
saints? I have never known exercises of this 
character treated by any persons of the Unita- 
rian denomination, otherwise than with frigid 
indifference, or repelling contempt. And I can, 
with equal sincerity, declare, that I have never 
known an'instance of a Unitarian, who appeared 
to be led on through the stages of seriousness, 
anxiety, and deep conviction of sin, to a cordial 
acceptance of the offers of salvation through a 
Redeemer, who did not, in the course of these 
exercises, solemnly renounce the Unitarian sys= 
.tern, as pine which afforded no adequate hope td 



LETTER VIL 



the soul, and which would by no means stani 
the test of either scripture or experience. 

I suppose, indeed, that no Unitarian living, 
would think it any compliment to have eitheF 
the belief or the experience of such exercises as 
Tha*e referred to above, ascribed to him. Dr, 
Priestley speaks of them in a manner expressive 
of both contempt and horror** Mr. Belsham 
denounces every thing of this kind, so frequently 
and unceremoniously, that proof of his opinion 
on the subject is not necessary. Indeed he goes 
so far as to speak of ardent love to Christ 
as an unreasonable feeling, and as one 
which deserves to be considered as a mere illu* 
sive imagination. Can we, then, my Friends, 
with the sacred volume in our hands, and, 1 
trust I may add, with the personal experience 
of many of us, deeply impressed upon our 
hearts; — can we regard with any other feelings 
than those of abhorrence, a scheme which open^ 
ly turns into ridicule those conflicts, consola- 
tions and joys, which have been for ages conse- 
crated in the experience of the truly pious, and 
without which, in some degree, we conscier^ 
tiously believe, no man shall see the Lord? 

* Memoirs of himself, p, f. 



•558 



LETTER TIL 



and delightful interest in the bosom of every oii£ 
who loves the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. 

But, I ask, is Unitarianism friendly to these 
exercises, as a system of experimental piety? 
Is it consistent with them? Is it not directly hos- 
tile to them? Nay, do not the great body of 
Unitarians ridicule these exercises as fanatical 
and delusive? In fact, are not their views of hu- 
man nature, of the Saviour's character, and of 
the ground of hope toward God, utterly irrecon- 
cileable with such views and feelings as have 
been described, and which hold so conspicuous 
a place among the pious breathings of scripture 
saints? I have never known exercises of this 
character treated by any persons of the Unita- 
rian denomination, otherwise than with frigid 
indifference, or repelling contempt. And I can, 
with equal sincerity, declare, that I have never 
known an'instance of a Unitarian, who appeared 
to be led on through the stages of seriousness, 
anxiety, and deep conviction of sin, to a cordial 
acceptance of the offers of salvation through a 
Redeemer, who did not, in the course of these 
exercises, solemnly renounce the Unitarian sys- 
.tern, as ^oae which afforded no adequate hope t6 



LETTER YIL 



the soul, and which would by no means stani 
the test of either scripture or experience. 

I suppose, indeed, that no Unitarian living, 
would think it any compliment to have either 
the belief or the experience of such exercises as 
Tha^e referred to above, ascribed to him. Dr> 
Priestley speaks of them in a manner expressive 
of both contempt and horror* Mr. Belsham 
denounces every thing of this kind, so frequently 
and unceremoniously, that proof of his opinion 
on the subject is not necessary. Indeed he goes 
so far as to speak of ardent love to Christ 
as an unreasonable feeling, and as one 
which deserves to be considered as a mere illu- 
sive imagination. Can we, then^ my Friends* 
with the sacred volume in our hands, and, 1 
trust I may add, with the personal experience 
of many of us, deeply impressed upon our 
hearts; — can we regard with any other feelings 
than those of abhorrence, a scheme which open^ 
ly turns into ridicule those conflicts, consola- 
tions and joys, which have been for ages conse- 
crated in the experience of the truly pious, and 
without which, in some degree, we conscien* 
tiously believe, no man shall see the Lord? 

* sWmoirs of himself, p, f > 



260 



LETTER VIL 



IV. A fourth Objection to the Unitarian sys- 
tem which deeply impresses my mind, is, that 

I NO WHERE FIND THAT CLOUD OF WITNESSES 
TO ITS CONSOLATION IN A DYING HOUR, which 

in all ages have been furnished by the 
Orthodox system. 

Those principles which are fcrund most effec- 
tually to support and elevate the mind, in that 
trying season when "heart and flesh fail," and 
when all the realities of eternity are opening on 
the soul, have certainly a strong presumptive 
claim to our confidence, fn that honest hour, 
when the world is withdrawing, when the solici- 
tations of appetite and passion are silent, and 
when the judgment seat is in view, many a prin- 
ciple which once appeared firm and tenable, 
has most ignobly and miserably failed its pos- 
sessor, and left him without a prop. It behoves 
every one of us, therefore, in the day of our 
health, to ask ourselves, without partiality, and 
without evasion, how far the hopes which we 
cherish will be likely to stand this selemn, this 
inevitable test. 



LETTER VIL 



26 i 



Now, I can aver, with unwavering confidence, 
that I have never known the system of the 
Orthodox to pail any one, in that interesting 
hour which tries the hopes of men. That is, I 
have never known any one who had cordially 
embraced the system of redemption through the 
blood of Christ; who had built all his confi- 
dence on the atoning sacrifice and perfect right- 
eousness of a Divine Redeemer; and who had 
long cherished the hope that he should finally 
receive eternal life, as the purchase of the Sa- 
viour's blood, and the gift of his hands: — i 
have never known such a man, when he came 
to die, fearful that this ground was not firm 
enough to support him, and disposed to aban- 
don it for something which promised to be more 
adequate to his wants. 1 have known some 
such, indeed, fearful lest they might have de- 
ceived themselves as to their own personal char- 
acter; lest they might not have been really 
building on the Saviour, but on something else* 
In short, of the great Foundation of their hope 
itself, they had no apprehension, but only 
whether they were resting upon it. But never 
did I see or hear of a man who, in those trying 
circumstances, began to think that he had made 



i62 



LETTER VII, 



too high an estimate of Christ, or who regretted 
that he had relied upon Him so much, or laid so 
much stress upon his atonement and his right- 
eousness. On the contrary, no one, I will ven- 
ture to say, ever knew a votary of Orthodoxy 
who did not meet death with joy and triumph, 
just in proportion to the degree in which he was 
assured, that he was really and practically a 
believer in Christ. )trrd O, how often have I 
seen such leave the world in the most joyful and 
triumphant manner! How often have I heard 
them, with the smile of assured hope, and some- 
times with the rapture of anticipated glory, 
marked on their dying features, exclaim — / am 
not ashamed^ for I know in whom I have believ- 
ed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep 
that which I have committed to Him against that 
day. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, 
where is thy victory? Thanks be unto God, who 
giveth me the victory through my Lord Jesus 
Christ! And close the scene, by crying out, 
-with their expiring breath, Lord Jesus receive 
my spirit ! 

Can the same be said with truth of Unitary 
»ns and their system? It, most assuredly, can- 



LETTER Yil 



not. I have known many, very many, who felt 
confident and satisfied with that system in the 
days of their health; but who, when death ap- 
proached, renounced it, as affording to the soul 
no foundation of hope. Then, when they took 
a retrospect of all the sins and short-comings of 
their lives, they began to see that, without a 
better righteousness than their own, they could 
never appear before a holy God in peace. They 
have, accordingly, abandoned, — wholly aban- 
doned, their old ground; and felt constrained to 
fall at the feet of ImmanueJ, and to exclaim^ 
humbled and adoring, with Thomas, my Lord* 
and my God! And, even among those who did 
not thus renounce their old creed, but died fond- 
ly cleaving to it; the utmost that I have ever 
heard of, as manifested by them, on the ap- 
proach of death, was a certain philosophick calm' 
ness. This, it is but justice to say, was Remark- 
ably displayed in the death of Dr. Priestley 
himself. But his calmnriess, according to his bi- 
ographer, was not only connected with a belief 
in the doctrine of Universal Salvation, but 
founded upon it* "He desired me, 1 ' says his 
Son, (this was a few hours before he expired) 
He desired me to reach him a pamphlet which 



304 



LETTER Vlh 



"was at his bed's head, 'Simpson on the Dura 
u tion of future Punishment.' It will be a source 
**of satisfactian to you to read that pamphlet, 
* said he, giving to me. It contains my sen- 
"timents; and a belief in them will be a sup- 
u port to you, in the most trying circumstan 0 

u CeS, AS IT HAS BEEN TO ME. We shall ALL 

" meet finally. We only require different 
" degrees of discipline, suited to our tempers, to 
• ; prepare us for final happiness."* But who 
ever witnessed, in a Unitarian, such a death as 
that of Stephen, or such as that which Paul des- 
cribes, as exhibited by the triumphant believer? 
I believe it may with confidence be asserted, 
that such a sight was never witnessed. In- 
deed a great part of the language concerning the 
Lord Jesus Christ, which the inspired writers 
put into the mouths of dying christians, or of 
christians approaching the end of their pilgri- 
mage; and which the pious, in all ages, have 
delighted to adopt and to utter, on the confines 
of eternity, could not possibly, in my opinion, be 
uttered by a Unitarian, without either assuming 
a new vocabulary, or entirely changing his prin- 
ciples. 

* Memoirs of Dr. Priestley, Vol. I. £17, 



LETTER VM. 



freed I say, my Friends, that this is a consid 
eration which ought deeply to impress the heart 
of every one who expects to die, and who de- 
sires to embrace such principles* and take such 
ground, as will stand the test of a dying hour? 
It is far from my Wish to make any unfair appeal 
to the passions of men, I know that the artful 
and designing have sometimes made such ap- 
peals on behalf of the grossest error. But is 
not this one of the subjects, on which the heart 
and the feelings ougijt to be solemnly consult- 
ed? O that I could persuade every one who is 
about to decide between that blessed foundation 
of hope hich the Bible exhibits, and that which 
Unitarians recommend, to place before him the 
solemnities of a dying bed; the rupture of those 
ties which bound him to a retiring world; the 
end of all human illusions; and the approach of 
a decisive reckoning, and a dread eternity! O 
that they were wise, that they understood this* 
that they would consider their latter end! 

V. I object to the Unitarian system, as being 5 
in my opinion, decisively and necessarily 
Unfriendly to the Spirit of Missxonso 

23 



LETTER Vil 



By the Spirit of Missions, I mean an enlight 
ened, ardent, and persevering zeal for the 
spread of the Gospel among those who have it 
not. 1 think I am not deceived when I say, that 
such a spirit has remarkably characterized the 
Orthodox in all ages, and just in proportion as 
their system was pure and predominant. Their 
expenditures and labours to promote this great 
object; their holy courage, self-denial, suffer- 
ings, perseverance, and occasional sacrifices of 
life, in the precious cause, are on record. We 
have seen them devoting their time, and talents, 
and strength, and property, to the preaching of 
the gospel among the poor and destitute. We 
have seen them going with the light of life, to 
dreary frontier settlements, to benighted pagans* 
.and to the ignorant and depressed children of 
Africa* We have seen them contriving and ex- 
erting themselves to send christian instruction 
in almost every variety of form, to the labourers 
in mines and manufactories ; to the hut of the 
beggar; to the wigwam of the savage; to the 
cells of hospitals; and to the prisoner's dungeon. 
Nor is this to be wondered at. It is precisely 
what might be expected of those who Jove the 
T^ord Jesus Christ supremely $■ who have expe= 



LETTER VH. 



rienced in their own souh the sweetness of his 
gracious consolation; who firmly believe that 
there is salvation in ho other; and who are deep- 
ly convinced that the situation of those who are 
strangers to the grace of Christ must he deplc 
rable in time and eternity, 

I do not assert, indeed, that the Orthodox 
have been always equally awake to the im- 
portance of this object, or equally zealous in 
pursuing it; far less that they have ever done 
all that became them, in this or any other de~ 
partment of christian duty. But I do conseien- 
tiously believe that the whole of the substan- 
tial, faithful missionary work that has ever been 
done in our world, has been done by the Ortho- 
dox, a3 distinguished from Unitarians; and that 
the latter have manifested a most marked and 
characteristick deficiency in the Missionary 
Spirit, Have Unitarians ever fitted out a mis- 
sion to the heathen? I have never heard of it* 
They have often had, at different periods, in the 
course of their history, great wealth, talent^, 
and enterprize, at their command. But have 
any of these ever been, in good earnest, employ- 
ed in imparting a knowledge of Christianity to 



LETTER yih 



the poor, the ignorant, the depressed, and the 
friendless? They have, indeed, it must be con- 
fessed, in former times, made great exertions-, 
and incurred large expenditures, for propagat- 
ing their opinions; and they are still doing the 
same. But in what manner? By going out, as 
'other denominations have done, into the high- 
ways and hedges, and endeavouring to bring in 
to the gospel feast, the maimed, the lame, the 
halt, and' the blind? Have they directed their 
exertions to the children, of want and sorrow, 
and made the chosen objects of their evangelical 
labours those who had none to help them? No; 
they have always been remarkable for sending 
their missionaries and their books to the most 
polished and populous places; to the upper clas- 
ses of society: to the rich and literayi to those 
who already enjoyed the Gospel, and stood in no 
need of their instruction. So it has ever been, 
with so little exception, as not to impair, in the 
least degree, the force of the general assertion; 
and so it continues to be to the present hour. 

And, indeed, with the prevalent Unitarian 
belief, could it be expected to be otherwise? 
Surely those who believe that all men will final- 



Letter vfl-. 



269 



iy be saved; and, of course, that no particular 
faith or religious system, is necessary to salva- 
tion; those who deny the original corruption of 
human nature, and do not, consequently, consid- 
er the heathen, or any other class of men, as in 
such deplorable circumstances as the Orthodox 
believe them to be; antl those who, systematical 
]y, discard the constraining influence of that su- 
preme love, and deep sense of obligation, to Christ, 
which prompt the Orthodox to exert themselves 
in extending the kingdom of an atoning and re= 
deeming Deliverer; — those who embrace these 
opinions, cannot reasonably be expected to feei 
that desire for the spread of the Gospel, and the 
conversion of souls, which the Orthodox fee! 
themselves bound every hour to cherish. 

This representation is confirmed by Mr. Rob- 
inson, an English Unitarian, of great talents, 
and of extensive information. "It is remarka- 
" ble," says he, "that Socinianism has never 
"been in fashion with the illiterate; for in re- 
"gard to the Polish churches, the ministers, 
" and the far greater part of the members, were 
" either noblemen, or eminent scholars, or 
* l both," Again: "It is remarkable that So- 



5T0 



LETTER VIL 



u cinians seldom address their peculiar senti- 
k * ments to the populace, but generally to gen 
"tlemen of eminent learning and abilities* 
44 Though this is inconsistent with that profes- 
"sion of the simplicity of revelation, which they 
"so commonly treat of in all their accounts of 
"the Gospel, as it was written by the Evange- 
lists; yet it is perfectly agreeable to that 
"philosophical, scientifick mode of expounding it, 
" which they have thought proper to adopt, and 
" which will probably always put it out of the 
•'power of man to render Socinianism popu- 
lar."* 

Are these facts? Then there is assuredly 
something false and rotten in the system to 
which they belong. That mode of interpreting 
and exhibiting the religion of Jesus Christ 
which cannot be adapted to the capacities of the 
poor, the ignorant, and, in general, to the low- 
est classes of society; that system, calling itself 
Christianity, which is ever found to flourish 
most among the rich, the splendid, and the lux- 
urious; and to languish when attempted to be 
propagated in the humbler walks of life: that 

* EQclesi&sl&al Ktmrches, p. 604, 605, 



.LETTER V\L 



system which, indeed, none but (he ranks in 
some degree literary, can understand or relish: 
that system, in fine, which takes away almost 
the whole of the motives which the Orthodox 
feel for endeavouring to send the glad tidings o 
salvation to the ends of the earth — cannot, I will 
venture to say, be the system which is found 
in the Gospel of the grace of God. It cannot be 
the system which our blessed Lord described, 
when, in the synagogue at Nazareth, He appli= 
ed these words of the Prophet to himself — The 
Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has 
anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; 
He hath sent me to heal the broken hearted, to 
preach deliverance to the captives, and recover- 
ing of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them 
that are bruised; or, when, in answer to the in- 
quiry of John's disciples, who He was, He said 
■ — Go, and shew John again those things which 
ye do hear and see: the blind receive their sight, 
and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed, and 
the deaf hear; the dead are raised up, and the 
poor have the gospel preached unto them. 

VI. One more insurmountable Objection to 
the Unitarian system, with me, is, that Infidej/S 



LETTER VII. 



EVERY WHERE PREFER THIS SYSTEM TO ANY 
OTHER THAT BEARS THE CHRISTIAN NAME, and 

feei no reluctance to uniting in worship with its 
adherents. 

It is not an uncommon thing for Unitarians to 
boast, that avowed Deists, on hearing, or read- 
ing the discourses of their distinguished preach- 
ers, have greatly admired them; and declared, 
that if the system exhibited in them were Chris- 
tianity, they had no longer any difficulty in 
taking the name of Christian. I have been 
credibly informed of repeated instances of this 
kind in reference to the Rev. Mr. Charming* s 
sermon, preached and published in Baltimore. 
Unitarians consider this fact as a most potent 
argument in favour of their creed; as an argu- 
ment, that it is so rational, and so strongly com- 
mends itself to common sense, that even infidels 
bow to its authority. But is it not a much more 
direct and powerful proof of something very 
different; viz. that Unitarianism and Infidelity 
are so closely allied, that he who embraces the 
one, has really no good reason for objecting to the 
other? This, I have no doubt, is the real ground 
of the fact in question* And, indeed, how can 



LETTER VII. 273 

it be otherwise? The prevalent system of Uni- 
tarianism at the present day, not only makes 
Christ a mere man, and discards the whole doc* 
trine of Redemption; bat also, as you have seen 5 
rejects the inspiration of the scriptures; and, 
in short, presents a system reduced so nearly to 
a level with the Deisticai scheme, and allows so 
much latitude of belief and of feeling, with re- 
gard to what is left, that the Deist must be 
fastidious indeed, who would feel much repug- 
nance to joining in communion with a Unitarian 
society. Dr. Priestley seems to have been very 
much of this opinion; for, in writing to a Uni- 
tarian friend, concerning a gentleman who had 
been commonly reputed a Deist, he observes — = 
"He is generally considered as an unbeliever: 
U IF SO, HOWEVER, he cannot be far from 
44 us; and I hope in the way to be not only al* 
44 most but altogether what we are."* Mr* 
Belsham^ according to a representation given in 
a former Letter, explicitly acknowledges, that 
Unitarianism does not differ, in any important 
point, from serious Deism; and, ifl another 



* See History of American Unitarianism 



2?4 



LETTER VH. 



place, does not hesitate to avow, that he would 
much rather embrace Deism than Orthodoxy,* 

So Infidels themselves view the matter. They 
have little objection to the prevalent forms of 
Unitarianism; not because they are willing to 
approximate to real Christianity, but because 
they see something, under the name of Christi- 
anity, NEARLY APPROACHING TO THEM. The 

Editors of the French Encyclopedic, under the 
article Geneva, express themselves thus— 
" Many ministers of Geneva have no other re* 
"ligion than complete Sochiianism, rejecting all 
"they call mystery, and supposing it to be the 
"first principle of true religion to propose 
"nothing for belief contrary to reason. Thus 

when we press them on the necessity of Revc- 
'Tation, a position so essential to Christianity, 
"many of them substitute in its place utility, 
"which appears to them a softer term. In this, 

if they are not orthodox, they are at least 
"consistent. At Geneva, there is less com- 
" plaint made than elsewhere of the progress of 
" infidelity ^ which ought to excite no surprise: 
"religion is there reduced almost entirely to the 

t Review of WUberfwee* 



LETTER m 



2$S 



^ worship of one God, at least with all above 
{ the lowest ranks. Respect for Jesus Christ,' 
^and the Scriptures, is, perhaps, the only thing 
9 which distinguishes the Christianity of Geneva 
" from pure Deism*" 

Again; under the article Unitarians^ they 
£peak as follows— "The Unitarians have al* 
" ways been regarded as christian divines who 
"had only broken and torn off a few branches 
"of the tree, but who still held to the trunk; 
" whereas they ought to have been considered 
" as a sect of philosophers, who, not willing to 
" give too violent a shock to the worship and 
"opinions, true or false, which were then re- 
ceived, did not choose openly to avow pure 
u Deism, and reject formally, and without re- 
serve, every kind of revelation; but who were 
" continually doing, with respect to the Old and 
"New Testament, what Epicurus did with res- 
"pect to the gods; admitting them verbai^ 

"LY, but DESTROYING THEM REALLY, In fact, 

"the Unitarians received only those parts of 
"scripture which they found conformable to 
"the natural dictates of reason, and which 
served to support and confirm the sysfefflfe 



21S 



LETTER VH. 



" which they had embraced. A man becomes a 
" Protestant. Soon perceiving the inconsistent 
u cy of the principles which characterize Pro- 
"testanism, he applies to Socinianism for a 
u solution of his doubts and difficulties; and he 
"becomes a Socinian. From Socinianism to 
w Deism there is but an imperceptible shade, 
"and a single step to take — and he takes it." 

In coincidence with this representation, it 
cannot be denied, that the transitions from Uni a 
t&rianism to open infidelity; — the instances in 
which the single, short step, just referred to, has 
been taken, have been numerous in Great Brit- 
ain, and in the United States, as well as on the 
continent of Europe. Nay, instances have not 
been wanting of their students of theology, and 
even their ministers, becoming avowed Deists, 
and even Atheists. The history of the Acade- 
my at Hackney, in England, presents a strik- 
ing number of very instructive memorials on this 
subject. Mr. Belsham himself does not deny it* 
" This fact," says he, "to a certain extent, can- 
"not be denied; and most surely it excited 
" unpleasing sensations in many, and not least 
u in the minds of those whose endeavours to 



LETTER ml 



1 torm them to usefulness in the church, wen 
:/t thus painfully disappointed." 

Nor is a fact, the counterpart of that which I 
have just stated, less striking. It is the feci 
that Deists are peculiarly apt to unite in plans 
and worship with Unitarians. Accordingly, it 
is, I believe, notorious, that, in all those places*, 
in our Middle and Southern States, in which 
Unitarian congregations have been organized^ 
within a few years past, a number of Deists 
have joined them, and become attendants on 
their worship; and that without any change of 
opinion. They have alledged, that, in such 
places of publick worship, they seldom or never 
heard any thing that wounded their feelings, or 
interfered with their principles, and chat they 
were fond of the good moral lectures which 
they commonly heard from the preachers. 
They have remarked, indeed, that a few of the 
clergymen who ministered to these congrega- 
tions, (as, for example, now and then an Arian 
who came along) were a little more serious, and 
disposed to make rather more of the Scriptures, 
and of Christ, than the other Unitarian preach- 
ers were wont to do; and this they could wish 

24 



278 



LETTER VIL 



were otherwise. But, then, they have remark 
ed, at the same time, that, as the highest Arians, 
and the lowest Socinians, appeared to regard 
each other with entire complacency, and evL 
dently made a common cause; and as the most 
^erious of them were infinitely less revolting 
than the Orthodox, they have, in general, felt 
very comfortably at home among them. Some 
who attend at Unitarian places of worship, upon 
principles, and with feelings of this kind, I per- 
sonally know; of others I have heard, and have 
no doubt they are numerous. 

But I must bring this long Letter to a close. 
If the foregoing objections be well founded; if 
Unitarianism be averse to a candid avowal of 
its own principles; if it be chargeable with a 
characteristick indifference to truth; if it be 
hostile to the exercises of vital piety; if it strik- 
ingly fail of yielding support and consolation in 
death; if it be peculiarly deficient with respect 
to the spirit of missions; and, finally 3 if it be 
nearly allied to Deism, and be universally pre- 
ferred by Deists, to any other system which 
bears the christian name; — need we further tes= 
timony that it is not the religion of Jesus Christ 

but ANOTHEB GOSPEL? 



LETTER VIII 



Objections likely to be made by Unitarians to the fort- 
going statements — Answer — Advice with respect t* 
the proper manner of treating Unitarians — Reason? 
in support of that advice — Concluding Remarks and 
Counsels* 

Christian Brethren, 

I have endeavoured, in the foregoing pages^ 
to the best of my knowledge and understanding, 
to set before you a portrait of Unitarianism as 
it really is. I can sincerely say, that I have 
not, intentionally, distorted or magnified a sin- 
gle feature. My aim has been to inform you, 
not merely what the adherents of this system 
say of themselves; but also what the pious have 
said of them, in all ages; and, further, what 
consequences, both in regard to doctrine and 
practice, appear to me naturally, and indeed 



280 



LETTER Vfil. 



aecessarily, to flow from their fundamental prin- 
ciples. And the whole has been done with the 
sole view of assisting you in forming a judgment, 
how they and their principles ought to be re- 
garded by Christians, 

It is probable that many Unitarians will tell 
you, that the picture 1 have drawn is not a cor- 
rect likeness; that the representation given of 
their opinions, is altogether erroneous. And 
I have no doubt that some who go under the gen- 
eral name of Unitarians, may with truth say, 
that they abhor some of the sentiments which I 
have set down as parts of Unitarianism. But 
what would such persons wish us to do? Here 
are embattled hosts, drawing near the camp of 
our Master and King, and manifesting every 
disposition to destroy both Him and us. They 
send us word, that they are wiliing to be at 
peace with us, on condition that we suffer them 
to come into our camp, and to vilify and stab 
our beloved Lord at pleasure. And when we 
decline to receive them as friends on these 
terms, they complain of us, as narrow-minded 
and unsocial, and even bitter and malignant. 
Some of this hostile army, are particularly loud 



LETTER VIII. 



281 



in their complaints of the injustice of our refu- 
sal. "Why," say they, u will you refuse to ad- 
"mitusinto your camp, since we hy no means 
" carry our enmity to you and your king, so far 
"as the great mass of our associates. We ex- 
u ceedingly disapprove of a great deal that they 
" have said and done. Why, therefore, should 
" we be treated as if we resembled them? Sure- 
" ly this is not equitable." Our reply is, doubt- 
less, anticipated — "We cannot receive you, or 
u treat you otherwise than we do your associates 
" in arms. You confess that, although not so 
u intensely hostile as they are, you are still ene- 
" mies to the dignity and kingdom of our Mas- 
w ter. This is enough for us. We have r.o wish 
"to receive known and avowed foes into our 
"camp. But if we were willing to take per- 
sons of your character by the hand, still we 
" could not consistently do it, as long as you re- 
M main connected with the worst of our oppo- 
"sers* You say, you entirely disapprove 
44 of much that they have said and done; but 
"•still you take their name; you follow their 
"leader; you fight in their ranks; you aid and 
^abet them in all that they do; nay, you 
"are not willing to be friends with us, unless 

24* 



LETTER ViiL 



u we will consent to take them to our friendship 
" with you. We will receive neither. We must 
"treat you all alike. As to all practical results, 
^you are equally guilty with them." 

Where is the injustice of this answer? It 
applies, most exactly, to the case before us. 
Although there may be some in the Unitarian 
camp in the United States, who are by no weans 
prepared to degrade the character of the Sa^ 
viour to mere fallible and peccable humanity; 
and who are far from wholly denying, either his 
Atonement, or the inspiration of his Word ; yet 
as long as they countenance, assist, and defend 
those who do go the whole length of all this; 
and as this is evidently understood to be the 
predominant system of Unitarianism in our 
country^ there can be no injustice in pursuing 
the course which I have done. It is against the 
system as it prevalently exists, that we 
wish to warn christians; and especially as we 
believe that even the more softened and plausi- 
ble forms of the general scheme, have, in reali- 
ty, the same spirit, and are leading to the same 
Issue* 



LETTER Vilt. 



It is not improbable that some Unitarians 
may further object, that I have not, after stat- 
ing such testimony or argument, in the forego- 
ing pages, annexed the Unitarian reply ; so that 
my readers might be able to weigh what is al~ 
ledged on both sides. I answer, the volume is 
larger than I intended, as it is; but if I had 
done this, it must have swelled to twice or 
thrice its present size. Besides, is this demand 
reasonable? Do our opponents act upon it 
themselves? Do no Unitarians allow themselves 
to state and enforce their own interpretation of 
scripture, and their own arguments, without 
stopping after each, to exhibit all, or the sub- 
stance of all, that learned and able Trinitarians, 
have said against them? They will not pretend 
that they do this. I can, however, assure you, my 
Christian Friends, that, in each case, as far as 
was in my power, I have carefully weighed 
what Unitarians are accustomed to say in reply 
to my testimonies and arguments; and have of- 
fered none, but what appeared to me to remain 
in full force, after all they have urged. 

You are now, I trust, prepared, without hes- 
itation, to answer the questions which were ask- 



284 



LETTER VIII. 



ed toward the close of the first Letter; — viz.— 
What estimate you ought to form of the opinions 
of Unitarians? How you ought to treat their 
persons? How to consider their preaching? How 
to act with respect to their publications ? Wheth- 
er you ought to regard them as Christians at 
all? Whether their congregations ought to be 
called churches of Christ? And whether the 
ordinances which thej administer ought to be 
sustained as valid? You are prepared, I hope, 
to decide, promptly and without wavering, that 
they are by no means to be considered as 
christians, in any scriptural sense of the 
word; that their preaching is to be avoided as 
blasphemy; their publications to be abhorred 
as pestiferous; their ordinances to be held un- 
worthy of regard as christian institutions; and 
their persons to be in all respects treated as de- 
cent AND SOBER DEISTS IN DISGUISE. Such is 

the estimate which I feel constrained to form for 
myself; and, of course, that which I wish to im- 
press upon your minds. And, if I do not de- 
ceive myself, you have seen enough to preclude 
all doubt as to its justice. If they reject every 
fundamental doctrine of the religion of Christ, 
they, of course, reject Christianity: if they re- 



LETTER VIII. 



ject Christianity, they, surely, are not christians; 
if they are not christians, their congregations, 
evidently, ought not to be called churches, nor 
their ordinances considered as valid: and, these 
things being so, you ought to regard a propo- 
sition to go and hear them preach, or to read 
their publications, as you would a proposition 
to hear a preacher of open infidelity, or to read 
an artful publication of a follower of Herbert or 
of Hume. 

I have said, that Unitarians ought to be con- 
sidered and treated as Deists in disguise. 1 
beg that this language may not be misconstrued. 
It is by no means my intention to intimate, for 1 
do not nelieve, that Unitarians are, as a sect, a 
set of hypocrites-, that they profess one thing 
and really believe another. I have no reason to 
doubt that they are as sincere in their profession 
of belief, that is, that they as really believe what 
they profess to believe, as any of us all. But my 
meaning is, that, while they assume, and insist 
on retaining, the christian name, their creed real- 
ly does not differ much, in substance, from tha* 
of serious Deists. Now, if this be the case, and 
if the fact that they are substantially Deists, be. 



286 



LETTER VIII. 



in effect, concealed from popular view by the 
name which they bear, what is this but being 
Deists under the christian name, in other words, 
Deists in disguise? I certainly take no pleasure 
in using offensive language. On the contrary, 
I can truly say, that every thing of this kind 
which i have employed in these Letters has 
been extorted from me by a painful sense of du- 
ty; but my obligation to state that which I deem 
both true, and highly important to the best in- 
terests of mankind, is paramount to all consider- 
ations of delicacy or ceremony. 

My advice to refuse all attendance on the 
preaching, and to avoid all perusal of the publi- 
cations, of Unitarians, will, perhaps, appear to 
some, of more dubious propriety. "What!" 
some may be ready to say, "are you so great 
" an enemy to free inquiry, and so fearful of the 
"effects of it on your own cause, as to oppose 
" the reading of works hostile to w hat you deem 
"truth? How are the friends of orthodoxy to 
4 -be established in the faith, but by temperate 
"and candid discussion? And how is such dis- 
"cussion to be impartially conducted, without at 
"least the occasional perusal of books written in 



LETTER VlHo 



28? 



-'opposition to the truth ?" This plea appears, 
at first view, by no means destitute of plausibil- 
ity; but will be found, I think, when carefully 
examined, wholly without force. 

I am a warm friend to free and impartial in- 
quiry; and where persons have leisure, a taste 
for reading, and such habits of investigation as 
qualify them for the task, I think it my duty to 
encourage extensive reading on both sides of the 
most fundamental subjects which become matter 
of controversy. Those who are called to defend 
the truth, are especially and solemnly bound to 
make themselves acquainted, as far as they have 
opportunity, with the diversified arts and re- 
fuges of error; and even some of those who are 
not official defenders of the faith, may, profitably 
to themselves, and usefully to others, employ & 
portion of their time in examining the works of 
hereticks, and even of the worst hereticks. Such 
an examination, when properly conducted, will 
tend to confirm their faith; to enlarge their minds 
and views; to put them on their guard against 
tlie spirit of Anti-Christ; and to render the truth 
as it is in Jesus more dear to their hearts. No 
man was ever yet injured by an enlightened, de- 



m LETTER VIIL 



vout, and cautious investigation of the ground 
on which he rests. And I will venture to add> 
that if any man will honestly and patiently read 
both sides of the Unitarian controversy: if he 
will, with diligence, and prayer, and candour, 
do ample justice to the best works in support of 
that system, as well a$ to the best in opposition 
to it, I have no fear of the result. I have no 
doubt that the further he proceeds in this 
course, the more he will discover of the perni- 
cious and blasphemous character of that "God„ 
denying heresy," which it is the object of these 
pages to exhibit and oppose. 

But where persons have little leisure or 
taste for reading; where they have no opportu- 
nity of persuing the ablest works which have 
been written in favour of the personal glory and 
work of the Redeemer, and no conscientious, set- 
tled purpose of procuring and studying them;— 
in short, where they do not firmly resolve to go 
deeply into the subject, and do something like 
full justice to both sides in the dispute; then 
let them carefully avoid Unitarian publications' 
To do otherwise would be like swallowing poi- 
son* without accompanying or following it with 



LETTER VIH, 



2*9 



the requisite antidote. Many a man has begun 
with the intention of reading no more than an 
occasional pamphlet or two on the side of her- 
esy, and fully resolving, at the same time, to 
study some of the best replies, or other respec- 
table treatises, on the opposite side: but as he 
advanced, his taste for the former daily increas- 
ed; they soothed his feelings, flattered his 
pride, and drew him insensibly into the snare* 
He forgot his resolution to read on the side of 
truth; and, in a little while, became confirm- 
ed in fundamental error, without any thing that 
deserved the name of sober inquiry. 

' I repeat it, then, avoid Unitarian publica* 
lions, as you would a cup of poison; unless you 
are prepared and determined to go fully into the 
examination of the controversy. When you are 
urged to purchase or peruse them, ask your* 
selves, in the fear of God ? "Am I in a situation 
H to read on both sides of this dispute, to such ex- 
tent, and with such patience, as its importance 
" evidently demands!' ' If you cannot answer this 
question in the affirmative, turn away from the 
proposal with pious abhorrence* Life is too 
25 



290 



LETTER Vlrf. 



short to be wasted on trash, and the soui too 
precious to be made the sport of a series of fan- 
cied experiments on deadly poison. Study the 
Bible more than any other book. There you 
wili find "truth without any mixture of error.' 5 
Recollect that you are hastening to a tribunal, 
where the dogmas of men can avail you nothing, 
and where the work of God will furnish the 
great and only standard of trial. In entreat you, 
then, to study it daily, with humble prayer, that 
you may be led into all truth, and that you may 
be enabled to apply it in a wise and profitable 
manner. The time and attention bestowed on 
this blessed Volume, you will never regret in a 
dying hour; but thousands, in that solemn hour, 
have reproached infidel and heretical seducers, 
as the authors of their ruin, and mourned, with 
anguish of spirit, over the folly of listening to 
their plausible but destructive falsehoods. 

But, if you avoid the preaching and the books 
of Unitarians, it will perhaps be asked, how 
ought you to treat their persons? I answer, with 
all that respect and benevolence whifch the ties of 
humanity and neighbourhood demand. Though 
-hey are in fatal error 5 though they preach 



LETTER VIIL 



201 



another gospel; an entirely different religion 
from that which you believe; yet this diversity 
does by no means dissolve the ties of nature, of 
kindred, or of society. Still they are children 
of the same common Parent, and they need all 
the tenderness of your compassion, and all the 
importunity of your prayers. Treat them, then, 
with attention and respect, Be ever ready to 
promote their welfare and happiness. Let all 
bitterness, and wrath, and animosity, be banished 
from your intercourse with therm Pray for 
them without ceasing; and endeavonr to T 
them by the lustre of your example* Let them 
see, in short, that you possess the spirit of the 
gospel; that you have no feelings of wounded 
pride, or personal resentment, on account of 
their differing from you ; but that a tender con- 
cern for their temporal and eternal interest, im- 
pels you to desire and pray, that God may give 
them repentance to the acknowledgment of the 
truth. 

How wcfuld you treat an avowed Deist, who 
should reside in your neighbourhood, and main- 
tain a decent, and even exemplary moral char- 
acter? You certainly would not think of with- 



LETTER VIII. 



•drawing from him the kind offices of society. 
iou would not s(udy to meet him with a scowl, 
and to convince him continually, by repulsive 
and contemptuous treatment, that you despised 
him, and wished to avoid his company. Far less 
would you allow yourselves to assail him with 
the language of scorn and reproach, whenever 
you happened to fall in his way. On the com 
trary, you would endeavour, by a mild and res" 
pectful deportment; by friendly offices; by a con- 
stant manifestation of christian benevolence; by 
embracing suitable occasions to converse with 
him, in a fraternal and affectionate manner, on 
i he great subject, respecting which you thought 
so differently ; and by showing, in every proper 
way, that you really wished him well, temporal- 
ly and eternally, to bring him to a better mind. 
Let this be the model for your treatment of Uni- 
tarians. If they are Deists in disguise, as I have 
alledged, there can be no doubt of the justice of 
such treatment. Were there to be any differ- 
ence of conduct on the part of Christians, in the 
two cases supposed, they ought, perhaps, to be 
more marked in their refusal to recognize Uni- 
tarians in their religious character, because they 
lay claim to the title of christian, while the others 
do not, but avow their real name and principle** 



LETTER mi. 



2§3 



Rely on it, my Friends, Unitarians have been 
too long courteously called Christians, and re- 
cognized as such by the Orthodox around them. 
We have too long suffered the principles of 
worldly politeness to betray us into unfaithful- 
ness to the cause of our Master* When Unita- 
rianism was rare in our country, and rather 
courted concealment than publicity; and when, 
in most cases, the sentiments of certain individ- 
uals on this subject were rather suspected than 
known, it was customary, particularly in some 
neighbourhoods, without scruple, to allow them 
a place among the various denominations of 
Christians; to associate with them, on equal 
terms, as such; and even to admit of free eccle- 
siastical intercourse. Some of the Orthodox, 
from local circumstances, have been so much in 
habits of this kind, that it seems difficult, if 
not a kind of outrage, to alter them. But 
is it not a duty to submit to such an altera- 
tion, painful as it may be to social feeling? If it 
was the duty of the Reformers and their adher- 
ents, to come out from Babylon the great, the 
mother of harlots and abominations; and if it be 
allowed, on all hands, to be incumbent on chris 
tians to refuse all fellowship, in matters of 



294 



LETTER VIIL 



religion, with the tribes of open infidelity; tome 
it appears equally plain, that christians ought 
no longer to acknowledge as such, or to think of 
meeting on a common religious ground, those 
who deny the christian's God, and preach en- 
tirely another gospel. Come out from among 
them; and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and 
touch not the unclean thing, and I mill receive 
you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith 
the Lord Almighty. 

With respect to the validity of sealing ordr. 
nances administered by Unitarians, the highest 
Judicatory of the Church to which we belong 
has given a decision, which ought to be general" 
iy known; which, I trust, will be regarded with 
approbation and respect by every Presbyterian 
in the United States; and which goes the whole 
length of justifying all that I have said, in the 
present Letter, respecting the manner in which 
that sect ought to be considered by christians* 

In the year 1814, a question was laid before 
:he General Assembly, by the Presbytery ©f 
Harmony, in the following words, viz. 



LETTER VIII. 



" A person who had been baptized in his in- 
Ct fancy by Dr. Priestley^ applied for admission 
"to the Lord's Table. Ought the baptism ad- 
"ministered by Dr. Priestly^ then a Unitarian^ 
"to be considered as valid?' 1 — The Assembly, 
after mature deliberation, decided as follows;™ 
viz. 

"Resolved, That this question be answered 
" in the negative; and it was accordingly deter- 
"mined in the negative. In the present state 
"of our country, whilst Unitarian errors, in va- 
" rious forms, are making their insidious ap- 
proaches; whilst the advocates of this heresy, 
"in many cases, are practising a system of con- 
cealment, and insinuating themselves into the 
u confidence of multitudes who have no suspi. 
"cionof their defection from the faith, the As- 
sembly feel it to be their duty to speak with- 
"out reserve. It is the deliberate and unani- 
"mous opinion of this Assembly, that those who 
"renounce the fundamental doctrine of the 
^Trinity, and deny that Jesus Christ is the 
"same in substance, equal in power and glory 
" with the Father, cannot be recognized as min- 
H isters of the Gospel, and that their ministrations 
"are wholly invalid," 



296 



LETTER Till. 



This decision needs no explanation or defence* 
It precisely accords with what you have seen in 
the fifth Letter, to have been the judgment of 
the primitive church, and of the pious in all 
ages. No law of the family of Christ was re- 
garded as more settled and familiar, than that 
those who denied the Divinity and Atonement 
of the Redeemer, were to be denied the name of 
Christian, and their ordinances rejected as of 
x\a validity. In deciding as they did, then, our 
church did no more than follow the example of 
primitive times, and the best models of ecclesi- 
astical order and purity, from that period to the 
present. 

This decision of our General Assembly has, 
indeed, been stigmatized by Unitarians, as a 
piece of ecclesiastical "intolerance" of a very 
edious kind. But such a charge displays as 
much of ignorance as of weakness. Happily for 
our country, neither the General Assembly of 
the Presbyterian Church, nor any other ecclesi- 
artical body in the United States, has a right to 
talk of "toleration*" or to attempt "intolerance," 
towards any religious community whatever. 



LETTER VIII. 



2S? 



Toleration presupposes a power to put down^ 
of which every one knows the suggestion to 
be ridiculous. But is it "intolerance" for a 
church to fix the terms for regulating its own 
communion? Has not every church, self-evident- 
ly, a right to say whom it will receive, and whom 
it will not receive, to its peculiar privileges? 
Does the father of a family "oppress" or "in- 
jure" the community in which he lives, when he 
gives notice that he cannot admit as residents 
under his own roof those who will not conform 
to his own rules? Certainly not. He may even 
make unwise or capricious rules, the operation 
of which may incommode and injure his own 
family; but he invades the liberty of no one out 
of it; and the good sense of one who should com- 
plain that such a man infringed on the rights of 
his neighbours, would not, I take it, be very fa- 
vourably estimated* In like manner, it is con- 
ceivable that the Presbyterian church may go to 
an extreme in narrowing the door of admission 
to her communion; but that is her own concern* 
Others have nothing to do with it* The only ef- 
fect can be to thin her ranks, and weaken her* 
gelf. Her own published views of this sub- 
ject appear to me entirely correct "Every 



293 



LETTER VIII. 



"•christian church, 55 she assserts, "is entitled 
a to declare the terms of admission into its 
"communion, and the qualifications of its min- 
isters and members; as well as the whole 
" system of its internal government which Christ 
" hath appointed. In the exercise of this right 
-" they may, notwithstandsng, err. in making the 
" terms of communion either too kx, or too 
" narrow: yet, even in this case, they do not 
" infringe upon the liberty or the rights of oth- 
"thers; but only make an improper use of their 
"own."* After this, it is hoped eo man will 
venture to talk of "Presbyterian intolerance," 
who either understands the meaning of terms, 
when applied to American churches, or who 
wishes to escape the ridicule of all persons of 
common sense. 

Let not the confidence with which Unitarians 
predict the downfall of Orthodoxy, and the spee- 
dy prevalence of their system throughout Chris- 
tendom, give you a moment's alarm. One of 
the arts by which they sometimes endeavour to 
recommend that system, is to predict, that, in a 

* Introduction to the Form of Government of the 
Prp&tytZrian Church, 



Letter vih. 



very few years, (some have said in ten) there 
will be no other form of Christianity than Uni- 
tarianism, countenanced by any respectable por- 
tion of mankind. Let no man's heart fail him at 
such predictions. They are "great swelling 
words of vanity,'' which will issue in nothing 
but the disappointment and shame of those who 
utter them. I am inclined, indeed, to believe 
that there will be, for a time, considerable ad- 
ditions to the ranks of Unitarian societies. But 
from what sources will these additions be drawn? 
From among the sober, thinking, and exen> 
plary members of Orthodox congregations? All 
probability and all experience say no. But from 
the ranks of infidelity; from among those who 
belong to no congregations whatever, and whc 
have forborne to connect themselves with any^ 
because there was too much religion among them 
for their taste. Those persons must have been 
very careless observers of what was passing be- 
fore them, who have not perceived, that infidels, 
^cepticks, the profane and licentious, those who 
wish to continue in sin, and yet to have no fear 
of hell, and in general the enemies of a strict 
and spiritual religion, are, in many places, flock- 
ing to the Unitarian standard. And as these 



800 



LETTER VHL 



form a numerous body, in every part of the 
worid, there can be little doubt that considera- 
ble numbers of them will adorn the triumph of 
Unitarians for a few years to come. But it will 
be a triumph as short as it is ignoble. It is just 
as incredible that such materials should form a 
respectable and permanent religious body, on 
which the Divine blessing may be expected to 
rest, as that the image in Nebuchadnezzar's 
dream, made up of brass, (the fine gold and even 
the silver are entirely wanting here) and iron* 
and clay, should have lasted forever. Their 
cause, like that image, will soon crumble to 
pieces, before the breath of Jehovah our 
bighteousness, whom they blaspheme. The 
truth as it is in Jesus, and the Church founded 
upon it, have survived the impious efforts of 
Cerinthus, and Ebion, of Noetus, and Artemon^ 
of Arms, and Socinus, and of a host like them; 
and it will survive, and grow, and triumph glo- 
riously, when the similar efforts of their succes- 
sors of the present day shall have gone the way 
of all such unhallowed and spurious things. 

I have thus, my Christian Brethren, complete 
ed the consideration of the principal subjects on 



LETTER TO* 



30 1 



ivhich I proposed to address you in these Let= 
ters. How the arguments which have been 
urged may impress your minds, I cannot venture 
to foretel; but I have urged none which did not 
appear to myself, Weighty and conclusive. I 
have studied, on the one hand, not to magnify 
the importance of any truth beyond what I ver- 
ily believe the word of God to warrant; and on 
the other, not to represent the guilt and danger 
of any error, as greater than the same unerring 
word, in my view, has pronounced it. I can- 
iiot help once more repeating, that it has given 
me real pain to employ the language which I 
have felt myself compelled to employ with res° 
pect to Unitarians and their principles; and 
nothing but a sacred regard to truth, to the du= 
iy which I owe to my Master in heaven, and to 
jour immortal souls, and the souls of your chil- 
3ren, would have induced me to adopt such lan- 
guage. If I do not deceive myself, I have de- 
sired, in every sentence that I have written, to 
speak the truth in love 3 and to recollect that both 
you and I must soon appear before the judg~ 
merit seat of Christ* 

•2§ 



£etter viiL 



Before I close, it is my earnest desire, my 
rfespected Friends, to remind both You and my* 
self of three considerations, which I humbly 
conceive ought never to be lost sight of on this 
subject, and a due regard to which cannot but 
be productive of the happiest effects. 

The first is. That while we sedulously main, 
lain, as doctrines, the great truths in support 
& .which T have written, it is of the utmost im- 
portance that We EMBRACE THEiM AS PRACTICAL 
PRINCIPLES, AND LIVE UNDER THEIR SANCTIFY- 
ING influence. We may hold the truth in 
"unrighteousness. Many, no douht^ have done So; 
Men may be perfectly orthodox in speculation; 
nay, they may be bigotted and even furious con- 
tenders for the faith once delivered to tht saints^ 
and yet know nothing of that cordial reception, 
of the truth, as a practical system, which distin- 
guishes real from nominal christians, and which 
alone can secure to us either the consolations^ 
ar the sanctifying effects, of that religion which 
we profess. Let us, then, often, and seriously 
inquire, while we maintain correct opinions con = 
cerning the Person and work of the blessed Sa. 
v'voviY, how our hearts stand affected towards 



LETTER VIII, 



him? Has the light of the knowledge of the glo- 
ry of God, as it shines in the face of Jesus Christ } 
shone into our hearts? Has He manifested 
self to US) not as He does to the world, but as He. 
does to them whom He has chosen out of the 
world! Has his personal glory inspired our su- 
preme love? Do we study to maintain an affec- 
tionate communion with Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost, as our covenant God, in all the ador- 
able perfections, and appropriate cinces of each 
Person? Does the love of Christ daily constrain 
us? Do we go to his blessed fulness continually 
for lighc, and strength, and sanctification, and 
comfort? As we are indebted to his great un- 
dertaking, and his atoning sacrifice, for all that 
we enjoy and hope for, do we habitually cherish 
that deep and tender sense of obligation which 
corresponds with this fact; coming to Him daily 
with love, gratitude, and thanksgiving, and rely- 
ing on Him for wisdom, righteousness, sanctified* 
tion, and complete redemption ? 

There is, indeed, little prospect of being able 
to impress the mind of any one with a just sensej 
of the importance of the doctrines which we have 
been considering, until they begin to be viewed 



804 



LETTER VIII. 



in the light of personal experience. Howevet 
perfectly we may demonstrate their fundamental 
nature, they will, after all, be really regarded as 
matters of speculation only, as long as those to 
whom they are addressed remain at ease in sin. 
But when their eyes are opened to see iheir real 
situation, as fallen and perishing sinners, then 
the question, whether the Saviour into whose 
hands they are invited to commit their souls, is 
the mighty God, or a frail and fallible man like 
themselves, will appear momentous indeed! 
Then they will not only embrace his Divinity as 
a doctrine of the Bible, but as the foundation of 
their hopes, and the life of their souls. Then 
they will see a beauty, a value, an infinite impor- 
tance, and a glory in this great doctrine, which 
no conclusions of reasoning ever imparted to it 
in their view before. Yes, my Friends, it is on- 
ly when we receive this precious truth in the love 
of it, that we can be said to be rooted and ground" 
ed in the faith. It is only then that we can be 
said to build vpon the foundation of the Apostles 
and Prophets^ Jesus Christ himself being' the chief 
§orner stones 



LETTER VIII. 



305 



The second suggestion which I wish to offer, 
relates to the importance of your endeavouring 
with all the diligence and solicitude which be 
come Christian Parents, daily to inculcate 

CORRECT SENTIMENTS IN RELATION TO THIS, A3 
WELL AS EVERY OTHER SUBJECT, ON YOUR BE- 
LOVED Children. 

5 

In these '"days of rebuke and of blasphemy, 59 
I know not a more important duty devolving on 
us as followers of Christ, than to train up our 
Offsprings in the knowledge and love of his 
truth. All the most precious interests of our 
children themselves, of civil society, and of the 
church of God, are involved in a faithful dis- 
charge of this duty. If we neglect to instruct 
and warn then, at a period of life in which the 
want of experience, the strength of passion, and 
a proneness to be carried away by plausible 
professions and appearances, peculiarly expose 
them to danger, the most fearful consequences 
may be expected; consequences involving noth- 
ing less than their eternal death; but their blood 
wiU be required at our hards. I know that some 
parents deliberately act upon the principle of 
taking no measures to enlighten the rsirHss of 
26* 



306 



LETTER VIII. 



their children on the subject of religion, and es- 
pecially of forbearing to prepossess them in fa- 
vour of any system of doctrine; on the plea, 
that any attempt to instil a particular set of sen- 
timents into their minds, has a tendency to All 
them with prejudices, and to interfere with an 
impartial inquiry and judgment for themselves, 
when they reach mature age. But can there be 
a more unreasonable plea? Do we calculate 
thus in the ordinary affairs of life? What should 
we think of that parent, who should determine 
never to inform his child, that if he thrust his 
hand into the fire, it will be burnt; or that if he 
swallow a virulent poison, it will destroy his life 
— for fear of filling his mind with prejudices? 
Or what should we think of the parent, who 
should refuse to apprize a child, whom he pro- 
fessed greatly to love, that lying and theft are 
base practices, which will infallibly bring those 
who indulge them to disgrace and punishment — 
under the pretence that he did not wish to pre- 
occupy his mind, or to interfere with free inqui- 
ry, on moral subjects? We should certainly pro- 
nounce such a parent either a monster of cruel- 
ty, or miserably insane. But if every parent 
consider it the part of wisdom and affection to 



LETTER VIII. 



307 



put his children on their guard, as early as pos- 
sible, against every thing which may endanger 
their temporal welfare; how much more press- 
ing is the obligation, in the view of a pious pa- 
rent, to warn them early and carefully against 
those seductive principles or companions which 
may jeopard their eternal happiness! Were 
you to see your children assailed by the arts of 
open infidels, reading their books, frequenting 
their impious assemblies, and beginning to bor- 
row their blasphemous cavils, you would, no 
doubt, consider the prospect as highly alarming, 
and hasten to employ all proper means to save 
them. But, if what I have said in the preceding 
pages be correct, the arts of Unitarians are not 
less seductive, nor the danger of yielding to 
them lest imminent, than those of open infideli- 
ty. To your children and dependants, then? 
you owe the solemn debt of faithful instruction 
and warning on this subject. Tell them the real 
nature of this "soul-desroying heresy/' Let 
them not fall blind-folded and unwarned over 
the fatal precipice. Lead them with humble 
diligence and prayer to the knowledge and the 
sanctuary of that blessed Redeemer, whose Di- 
rinity and atoning Sacrifice, form, as you have r 
seen, the only hope of sinful man* 



308 



LETTER VIII. 



The truth is, — and however offensive the ex- 
pression of it may be, 1 cannot forbear to ex- 
press it — the truth is, if I had no concern for 
the everlasting welfare of my children. I could 
no mpre consent that they should be brought up 
under Unitarian influence, or in Unitarian in- 
stitutions, than I could to place them under the 
direction of the avowed teachers of frigid and 
cheerless scepticism. Nay, I am compelled se- 
riously to doubt, whether it ought not to be 
deemed less dangerous to commit a youth to the 
tuition of an avowed infidel, than to that of one 
who would be zealous in endeavouring to instil 
into his mind the principles of a corrupt and de- 
lusive system, under the name of the Christian 
Religion. 

When I consider the tendency of Unitarian 
sentiments, especially in some of their prevalent 
modifications, equally to take away the most 
powerful motives to virtue, and the strongest 
barriers against vice, I should certainly feel as 
if, in commending my children to such guidance, 
I was exposing them to double danger; — dan- 
ger, I mean, of temporal, no less than spiritual 
ruin. Can any impartial man believe that the 



LETTER VIII. 



30i 



lax system of these men is as much calculated to 
form young persons to purity, self-denial, sobri- 
ety, diligence and true elevation of character, 
3s the system of the Orthodox? That it is as 
much adapted to humble pride, to curb the pas- 
sions, and to sanctify the life? I can only say, 
if it be, I must give up all belief in the connec- 
tion between causes and effects. Unitarianism 
appears to me to have a natural tendency to 
encourage the young in those habits of dissipa- 
tion, which are altogether unfriendly to great 
attainments in knowledge and virtue: and which 
the man of sound secular wisdom, as well as the 
christian, ought to wish to repress in his chil- 
dren, especially while their characters are form- 
ing. — Again, then, I say, expose not those who 
ought to be dear to you as your own souls, to 
such unhallowed and fatal influence. Endeavour 
to place thera in circumstances and under teach- 
ers favourable to their being led in "the old 
paths," in "the good way," which you may 
hope will conduct them to honour, to usefulness t 
and to eternal life. 

The third and last consideration to which I 
beg your regard, is the great importance 



31€ 



LETTER V«T. 



OF MANIFESTING THE INFLUENCE OF GENUINE 

Christianity on the temper and the prac- 
tice. Let not your Unitarian neighbours, who 
embrace a spurious Christianity, and who more 
resemble infidels, in drawing boastful compari- 
sons between themselves and the Orthodox, on 
the score of mora] virtue, than any other class of 
religionists with which I am acquainted; — let 
theai have no occasion to remark, that you are 
less pure, less benevolent, less publick spirited, 
than those whom you stigmatise as kereticks. 
Give no occasion to the adversary to speak re- 
proachfully. Let them rather be ashamed, hav- 
ing no evil thing to say of yon. Let it be seen 
that Orthodoxy is not a mere system of heartless 
specuJations, but that it is as benign and heav- 
enly in its influence, as it is scriptural in its au- 
thority. Study to spread its glory by the lustre 
of your example. Every one is not qualified to 
defend Christianity by argument; but every 
one may defend it quite as effectually and useful- 
ly by an eminently holy life. Endeavour, then, 
by the daily cultivation of every christian grace 
and virtue, and by going about, like your Divine 
Master, doing good, to recommend the truth to 
all around you. Make no arrogant claims. Say 



LEtTER VIH. 31! 

to none, either by your words or conduct, Stand 
ty>f or tue are holier than you; but let your lives 
be a continual sermon; let your light so shine be- 
fore men, that they may see your good works, and 
glorify your Father in heaven. 

My Christian Brethren, I have now done. 
With the freedom of a minister of Christ, and 
with the affectionate respect of one who feels a 
cordial interest in the welfare of you and your 
children, I have ventured to address you on the 
most important of all subjects. My first prayer 
is, that what I have written may be made to 
promote your spiritual benefit; my next, that 
you may receive it, as it is intended, as an offer- 
ing of unfeigned christian friendship. But it is 
a small thing to be judged of man's judgment. 
The day is approaching when You and I must 
stand before the judgment seat of that Saviour^ 
whose glory I have humbly endeavoured to vin- 
dicate. God grant that we all, as well as those 
whom we are now compelled to regard as ene* 
mies of the truth, may find mercy of the Lord in 
that day! God grant that, when that trial shall 
arrive, we may be found not to have rested ia 
speculaiive notions, but to have devoted our= 



31£ 



LETTER VI1L 



selves in heart and in life to Him who wa$ made 
sin for us^ though He knew no sin, that we might 
be made the righteousness of God in Him! His 
name shall endure forever. His name shall be 
continued as long as the sun; and men shall be 
blessed in Him: all nations shall call Him blessed^ 
Now blessed be his glorious name forever; and 
let the whole earth be filled with his glory! 
ftmen, and Amznt 



H 12.3 82 



